Combustion Plants as Point Sources

COMBUSTION IN ENERGY & TRANSFORMATION INDUSTRIESps010101 Activities 010101 - 010105

Emission Inventory Guidebook 15 February, 1996 B111-1

SNAP CODES: (See below)

SOURCE ACTIVITY TITLE: COMBUSTION IN ENERGY & TRANSFORMATION INDUSTRIES

Combustion Plants as Point Sources

The following activities are taken into account, when treating combustion plants individuallyas point sources.

Combustion plants with a thermal capacity < 300 MW, gas turbines and stationary engines,which may also be considered collectively as area sources, are covered by chapter B112“Combustion Plants as Area Sources” as well.

Combustion plants as point sourcesBoilers/Furnaces

SNAP97Codes

NOSECODE

NFRCODE

Thermalcapacity[MW]

Publicpower andcogenerationplants

Districtheating

Industrialcombustionand specificsector

Commercialandinstitutionalcombustion

Residentialcombustion

Agricultureforestryand fishing

Gasturbines

Stationaryengines

01 01 01 101.01 1 A 1 a x01 02 01 101.01 1 A 1 a x01 03 01 101.01 1 A 1 b x01 04 01 101.01 1 A 1 c • 300 x01 05 01 101.01 1 A 1 c x02 01 01 101.01 1 A 4 a x03 01 01 101.01 1 A 2 a-f x01 01 02 101.02 1 A 1 a x01 02 02 101.02 1 A 1 a x01 03 02 101.02 1 A 1 b x01 04 02 101.02 1 A 1 c • 50 x01 05 02 101.02 1 A 1 c and x02 01 02 101.02 1 A 4 a < 300 x02 02 01 101.02 1 A 4 b i x02 03 01 101.02 1 A 4 c i x03 01 02 101.02 1 A 2 a-f x01 01 03 101.03 1 A 1 a x01 02 03 101.03 1 A 1 a x01 03 03 101.03 1 A 1 b x01 04 03 101.03 1 A 1 c x01 05 03 101.03 1 A 1 c < 50 x02 01 03 101.03 1 A 4 a x02 02 02 101.03 1 A 4 b i x02 03 02 101.03 1 A 4 c i x03 01 03 101.03 1 A 2 a-f x01 01 04 101.04 1 A 1 a x01 02 04 101.04 1 A 1 a x01 03 04 101.04 1 A 1 b x01 04 04 101.04 1 A 1 c not x01 05 04 101.04 1 A 1 c relevant x02 01 04 101.04 1 A 4 a x02 02 03 101.04 1 A 4 b i x02 03 03 101.04 1 A 4 c i x03 01 04 101.04 1 A 2 a-f x01 01 05 101.05 1 A 1 a x01 02 05 101.05 1 A 1 a x01 03 05 101.05 1 A 1 b x01 04 05 101.05 1 A 1 c not x01 05 05 101.05 1 A 1 c relevant x

COMBUSTION IN ENERGY & TRANSFORMATION INDUSTRIESActivities 010101 – 010105 ps010101

B111-2 15 February, 1996 Emission Inventory Guidebook

Combustion plants as point sourcesBoilers/Furnaces

SNAP97Codes

NOSECODE

NFRCODE

Thermalcapacity[MW]

Publicpower andcogenerationplants

Districtheating

Industrialcombustionand specificsector

Commercialandinstitutionalcombustion

Residentialcombustion

Agricultureforestryand fishing

Gasturbines

Stationaryengines

02 01 05 101.05 1 A 4 a x02 02 04 101.05 1 A 4 b i x02 03 04 101.05 1 A 4 c i x03 01 05 101.05 1 A 2 a-f xx = indicates relevant combination

1 ACTIVITIES INCLUDED

This chapter covers emissions from boilers, gas turbines and stationary engines as pointsources. According to CORINAIR90, combustion plants with

− a thermal capacity ≥ 300 MW or− emissions of SO2 or NOx or NMVOC > 1,000 Mg/a1

should be considered as point sources /41/. Within CORINAIR other combustion plants mayalso be considered as point sources on a voluntary basis. Different criteria are applied for theclassification of combustion plants according to the Large Combustion Plant Directive(88/609/EEC)2 /9, 42/.

Boilers, gas turbines and stationary engines need to be treated separately (see table at start ofthis chapter). With regard to boilers, a combustion plant may consist of one single boiler ormay comprise a series of boilers of different sizes (joint plant). Therefore, whenever there ismore than one boiler on a site, a decision on the aggregation of these facilities to plants has tobe taken. Through this decision, an allocation to the respective SNAP categories is achieved.For aggregation criteria see Section 3.2 and Annex 1.

The subdivision of SNAP activities according to CORINAIR90 concerning combustionplants takes into account two criteria:

a) the economic sector concerning the use of energy- public power and co-generation,- district heating,- commercial and institutional combustion,- industrial combustion in boilers, (Note: Process furnaces are allocated separately.)

1 For CO2 a further optional criterion for point sources is the emission of > 300 Gg/a.

2 The Large Combustion Plant Directive covers combustion plants with a thermal capacity ≥ 50 MW in theEU. Gas turbines and stationary engines are excluded. Existing plants with a thermal capacity > 300 MWhave to be reported as point sources on an individual basis.



b) the technical characteristics- with respect to boilers, the installed thermal capacity,

- ≥ 300 MW,- ≥ 50 to < 300 MW,- ≤ 50 MW,

- other combustion technologies,- gas turbines,- stationary engines.

Emissions considered in this section are released by a controlled combustion process (boileremissions, emissions from the combustion chamber of gas turbines or stationary engines),taking into account primary reduction measures, such as furnace optimisation inside the boileror the combustion chamber, and secondary reduction measures downstream of the boiler orthe combustion chamber. Solid, liquid or gaseous fuels are used, where solid fuels comprisecoal, coke, biomass and waste (as far as waste is used to generate heat or power). In addition,a non-combustion process can be a source of ammonia emissions, namely ammonia slip inconnection with several NOx abatement techniques.

2 CONTRIBUTION TO TOTAL EMISSIONS

This section covers emissions of SOx, NOx, CO, CO2, NMVOC, CH4, N2O, NH3 and heavy

metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Se, Zn, V). The contributions of point source emissionsreleased by combustion plants to the total emissions in countries of the CORINAIR90inventory are given as follows in Table 1:

Table 1: Contributions of emissions from combustion plants as point sources to totalemissions of the CORINAIR90 inventory reported as point sources

Contribution to total emissions [%]

Sourcecategory

SNAP90code

SO2 NOx NMVOC CH4 CO CO2 N2O NH3

≥ 300 MW 01 01 0101 02 0103 01 01

85.6 81.4 10.2 5.5 16.8 79.0 35.7 2.4

50-300 MW 01 01 0201 02 0202 00 0103 01 02

6.4 5.4 1.1 0.6 3.1 6.5 1.9 0.2

< 50 MW 01 01 0301 02 0302 00 0203 01 03

0.2 0.3 0.1 0.05 0.1 0.2 0.1 0

Gasturbines1)

01 01 0401 02 0402 00 03

0 0.39 0.07 0.06 0.05 0.35 0.02 -

COMBUSTION IN ENERGY & TRANSFORMATION INDUSTRIESActivities 010101 - 010105 ps010101


03 01 04

Stationaryengines1)

01 01 0501 02 0502 00 0403 01 05

0.04 0.10 0.04 0 0.01 0.02 0 -

- : no emissions are reported

0 : emissions are reported, but the precise number is under the rounding limit1) Gas turbines and stationary engines may be reported either as point or as area sources.

In the literature concerning heavy metal emissions across Europe, point source emissions arenot reported separately. Giving an order of magnitude of heavy metal emissions released fromcombustion plants emission data of coal-fired public power plants in Germany and Austria ispresented here as an example, due to the availability of data:

Table 2: Contributions of heavy metal emissions from coal-fired public power plants tonational total emissions of Germany1) /36/

Contribution in [wt.-%]

Pollutant 1982 1990

As 38 27

Cd2) 7 7

Cr 12 4

Cu 22 8

Hg3) 11 14

Ni 5 4

Pb 8 1

Se 1 1

Zn 7 6

1) Western part of Germany2) E.g. emissions of Cd in Austria in 1992 were 0,2 % /37/.3) E.g. emissions of Hg in Austria in 1992 were 6 % /37/.

By comparing the heavy metal emissions in 1982 (without flue gas desulphurisation (FGD)installed) to the emissions in 1990 (where most plants are equipped with FGD), it can be seenthat the application of FGD technologies has lead to a significant decrease in heavy metalemissions within the last years.



3 GENERAL

3.1 Description

The emissions considered in this chapter are generated either by boilers or by gas turbines andstationary engines regardless of the allocation of plants to SNAP activities. Emissions fromprocess furnaces (combustion with contact) and from waste incineration are not included here(therefore see SNAP code 090200).

3.2 Definitions

ar as received, a reference state of coal which determines theconditions, when coal arrives at the plant /73/.

Availability(of an abatement technology)

ratio of full load operating hours with operating emissioncontrol technology to total full load operating hours of thepower plant; the availability β normally amounts to 99 %;but extreme low values of β can occur down to 95 %. Bytaking into account the start-up behaviour of emissionreduction technologies, the availability β can decreasefurther down to 92 %. Default values are proposed in Tables7 and 11.

Boiler any technical apparatus, in which fuels are oxidised in orderto generate heat for locally separate use.

Coking coal (NAPFUE 101) subcategory of hard coal with a quality that allows theproduction of a coke suitable for supporting a blast furnacecharge /114/.

Co-generation plant steam production in boilers (one or more boilers) for both,power generation (in a steam turbine) and heat supply.

Combined Cycle Gas Turbine(CCGT)

gas turbine combined with a steam turbine. The boiler canalso be fuelled separately.

daf dry and ash free, a reference state of coal which is calculatedwith reference to a theoretical base of no moisture or ashassociated with the sample (equivalent to maf - moisture andash free) /73/.

Hard coal refers to coal of a gross caloric value greater than 23,865kJ/kg on an ash-free but moist basis and with a mean randomreflectance3 of vitrinite of at least 0.6. Hard coal comprisesthe subcategories coking coal and steam coal4 /114/.

3 Mean random reflectance: characteristic value, which stands for a defined coal composition (modular

component is e.g. vitrinite).

4 The following coal classification codes cover those coals, which would fall into these subcategories /114/:



Integrated Coal GasificationCombined Cycle Gas Turbine(IGCC)

gas turbine fuelled by gas, which is a product of a coalgasification process.

Lignite (NAPFUE 105) non-agglomerating coals with a gross caloric value less than17,435 kJ/kg and containing more than 31 % volatile matteron a dry mineral matter free basis /114/.

maf moisture and ash free, a reference state of coal (equivalent todaf - dry and ash free) /73/.

Plant/Joint Plant classification with respect to boilers (one or more boilers)according to the respective boiler configuration on a givensite and the applied concept of aggregation. The stack-by-stack principle considers all boilers linked to the same stackas a common plant. On the other hand, according to thevirtual stack principle, all boilers which, for technical andeconomic reasons, could be connected to a common stack,are treated as one unit. It is also possible to carry out a stillbroader combination following e.g. administrative aspects.Gas turbines and stationary engines are allocated separately.A typical example of different allocation possibilities ofboilers to the SNAP codes is given in Annex 1.

Power plant steam generation in boilers (one or more boilers) for powergeneration.

Reduction efficiency(of an abatement technology)

difference between the pollutant concentration in the raw gas(craw) and the pollutant concentration in the clean gas (cclean)divided by the pollutant concentration in the raw gas(referred to full load operating hours); default values for thereduction efficiency η = (craw - cclean)/craw of differentemission control technologies are recommended in Tables 7and 11 (extreme low values of η can be up to ten percentbelow the values given).

Start-up emission here start-up emissions have been considered for boilersequipped with secondary measures: For SO2 and NO2 fromthe time when burners switch on up to the time when the

International classification codes(UN, Geneva, 19956)

323, 333, 334, 423, 433, 435, 523, 533, 534, 535,623, 633, 634, 635, 723, 733, 823

USA classification Class II Group 2 „Medium Volatile Bituminous“

British classification Class 202, 203, 204, 301, 302, 400, 500, 600

Polish classification Class 33, 34, 35.1, 35.2, 36, 37

Australian classification Class 4A, 4B, 5.



secondary abatement facility operates under optimumconditions; for CO up to the time when the boiler operates atminimum load.

Stationary engines spark-ignition or compression-ignition engines (2- and 4-stroke).

Steam coal (NAPFUE 102) subcategory of hard coal used for steam raising and spaceheating purposes. Steam coal includes all anthracite andbituminous coals not included under coking coal /114/.

Sub-bituminous coal(NAPFUE 103)

non-agglomerating coals with a gross caloric value between17,435 and 23,865 kJ/kg containing more than 31 % volatilematter on a dry mineral free matter basis /114/

Sulphur retention in ash difference between the sulphur dioxide concentrationcalculated from the total sulphur content of fuel (cmax) andthe sulphur dioxide concentration of the flue gas (ceff)divided by the sulphur dioxide concentration calculated fromthe total sulphur content of the fuel. Default values for thesulphur retention in ash αs = (cmax - ceff)/cmax are proposed inTable 8.

3.3 Techniques

3.3.1 Combustion of coal

3.3.1.1 Dry bottom boiler (DBB)The DBB is characterised by the dry ash discharge from the combustion chamber due tocombustion temperatures from 900 up to 1,200 °C. This type of boiler is mainly used for thecombustion of hard coal and lignite and is applied all over Europe.

3.3.1.2 Wet bottom boiler (WBB)Typical combustion temperatures exceeding 1,400 °C lead to a liquid slag discharge from thecombustion chamber. This type of boiler is used for hard coal with a low content of volatilesand is mainly applied in Germany.

3.3.1.3 Fluidised bed combustion (FBC)The combustion of coal takes place by injection of combustion air through the bottom of theboiler into a turbulent bed. The typical relatively low emissions are achieved by air staging,limestone addition and low combustion temperatures of about 750 - 950 °C. FBC is inparticular adapted to coals rich in ash. Only few large combustion plants are equipped withthe FBC technique; in the category of thermal capacities ≥ 300 MW mostly CirculatingFluidised Bed Combustion (CFBC) is installed.



3.3.1.4 Grate Firing (GF)The lump fuel (coal, waste) is charged on a stationary or slowly moving grate. Thecombustion temperatures are mainly between 1,000 and 1,300 °C.

3.3.2 Combustion of biomass

The combustion of biomass (peat, straw, wood) is only relevant for some countries (e.g.Finland, Denmark). FBC (mostly CFBC) and DBB facilities are installed.

3.3.3 Combustion of waste

For the combustion of waste, mostly grate firing installations are in use.

3.3.4 Combustion of gas/oil

3.3.4.1 Combustion in boilers (general aspects of the combustion techniques)For both, gas and oil combustion, the fuel and oxidising agents are gaseous under combustionconditions. The main distinctions between gas/oil combustion and pulverised coalcombustion are the operation designs of the individual burners of the boiler. With respect toemissions, a principal distinction can be made between burners with and without a pre-mix offuel and combustion air: pre-mixing burners are characterised by a homogeneous short flameand a high conversion rate of fuel bound nitrogen; non-pre-mixing burners are characterisedby inhomogeneous flames with understoichiometric reaction zones and a lower conversionrate of fuel bound nitrogen.

The importance of oil and gas combustion considered as point sources (see Section 1) is lowcompared to coal combustion, due to the smaller total capacity of these installations. Themain parameters determining emissions from oil and gas fired plants are given in Table 3.

Table 3: Main parameters determining emissions from oil and gas fired boilers /40/

Fuel dependent Process dependent

Pollutant Oil-fired boiler

SO2 x -

NOx x x

CO - x

Gas-fired boiler

SO2 x1) -

NOx - x

CO - x1) trace amounts x : relevant - : not relevant



3.3.4.2 Gas turbinesGas turbines are installed with a thermal capacity ranging from several hundred kW up to500 MW. Gaseous fuels are mainly used, such as natural gas or the product of coalgasification (e.g. CCGT or IGCC installations) or other process gases. Also liquid fuels areused, such as light distillates (e.g. naphtha, kerosene or fuel oil) and in some cases other fuels(e.g. heavy fuel oil). Combustion temperatures of up to 1,300 °C in the combustion chambersmay lead to considerable NOx emissions.

Gas turbines are installed as a part of different types of combustion plants such as CombinedCycle Gas Turbine (CCGT) or Integrated Coal Gasification Combined Cycle Gas Turbine(IGCC) Plants (see also Section 3.2). For IGCC plants, the only emission relevant unitconsidered here is the gas turbine (combustion chamber). For CCGT, in addition to the gasturbine any installed fossil fuelled boiler should also be taken into account.

3.3.4.3 Stationary enginesStationary engines are installed as spark-ignition engines and compression-ignition engines(2- and 4-stroke) with electrical outputs ranging from less than 100 kW to over 10 MW (e.g.in co-generation plants) /cf. 46/. Both types represent relevant emission sources.

3.4 Emissions

Relevant pollutants are sulphur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon dioxide (CO2)and heavy metals (arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), mercury (Hg),nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), selenium (Se), zinc (Zn) and in the case of heavy oil also vanadium(V)). Emissions of volatile organic compounds (non-methane VOC and methane (CH4)),

nitrous oxide (N2O), carbon monoxide (CO) and ammonia (NH3) are of less importance. For

species profiles of selected pollutants see section 9.

The emissions are released through the stack. Fugitive emissions (from seals etc.) can beneglected for combustion plants.

The emissions of sulphur oxides (SOx) are directly related to the sulphur content of the fuel,which for coal normally varies between 0.3 and 1.2 wt.-% (maf) (up to an extreme value of4.5 wt.-%) and for fuel oil (including heavy fuel oil) from 0.3 up to 3.0 wt.-% /15, 16/;usually, the sulphur content of gas is negligible. Sulphur appears in coal as pyritic sulphur(FeS2), organic sulphur, sulphur salts and elemental sulphur. A major part of the sulphur incoal comes from pyritic and organic sulphur; both types are responsible for SOx formation.The total sulphur content of coal is usually determined by wet chemical methods; bycomparison with results from the X-ray method, it has been found that standard analyticalprocedures may overestimate the organic sulphur content of coal /30/. The uncertaintyintroduced by the analytical procedures should be determined by further research.

For nitric oxide (NO, together with NO2 normally expressed as nitrogen oxides NOx) threedifferent formation mechanisms have to be distinguished (see also Section 9):



-formation of "fuel-NO" from the conversion of chemically bound nitrogen in the fuel(NOfuel),

-formation of "thermal-NO" from the fixation of atmospheric nitrogen coming fromthe combustion air (NOthermal),

-formation of "prompt-NO".

In the temperature range considered (up to 1,700 °C) the formation of "prompt6-NO" can beneglected. The majority of NOx emissions from coal combustion (80 to more than 90 %) isformed from fuel nitrogen. Depending on combustion temperatures, the portion of thermal-NOx formed is lower than 20 %. The content of nitrogen in solid fuels varies: for hard coalbetween 0.2 and 3.5 wt.-% (maf), for lignite between 0.4 and 2.5 wt.-% (maf), for cokebetween 0.6 and 1.55 wt.-% (maf), for peat between 0.7 and 3.4 wt.-% (maf), for woodbetween 0.1 and 0.3 wt.-% (maf), and for waste between 0.3 and 1.4 wt.-% (maf) /17/. Thecontent of nitrogen in liquid fuels varies for heavy fuel oil between 0.1 and 0.8 wt.-%, and forfuel oil between 0.005 and 0.07 wt.-% /17/. Natural gas contains no organically boundnitrogen. The content of molecular nitrogen in natural gas has no influence on the formationof fuel-NO; only thermal-NO is formed.

Emissions of non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOC), e.g. olefins, ketones,aldehydes, result from incomplete combustion. Furthermore, unreacted fuel compounds suchas methane (CH4) can be emitted. The relevance of NMVOC/CH4 emissions from boilers,

which are often reported together as VOC, is very low for large-sized combustion plants.VOC emissions tend to decrease as the plant size increases (cf. /24/).

Carbon monoxide (CO) appears always as an intermediate product of the combustion processand in particular under understoichiometric combustion conditions. However, the relevanceof CO released from combustion plants is not very high compared to CO2. The formationmechanisms of CO, thermal-NO and VOC are similarly influenced by combustion conditions.

Carbon dioxide (CO2) is a main product from the combustion of all fossil fuels. The CO2

emission is directly related to the carbon content of fuels. The content of carbon varies forhard and brown coal between 61 and 87 wt.-% (maf), for wood it is about 50 wt.-% and forgas oil and heavy fuel oil about 85 wt.-% .

The formation mechanism of nitrous oxide (N2O) has not yet been completely clarified. Thereis a possible formation mechanism based on intermediate products (HCN, NH3), which is

comparable to the formation of NO /55/. It has been found, that lower combustiontemperatures, particularly below 1,000 °C, cause higher N2O emissions /13/. At lowertemperatures the N2O molecule is relatively stable; at higher temperatures the N2O formed isreduced to N2 /55/. Compared to emissions from conventional stationary combustion units,nitrous oxides from either bubbling, circulating or pressurised fluidised bed combustion arerelatively high /13, 14/. In laboratory experiments, it has been found that nitrous oxide isformed by Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) processes, passing a maximum at, or close to,the optimum temperature "window" of the SCR process /13/.



Emissions of ammonia (NH3) are not caused by a combustion process; the emissions resultfrom incomplete reaction of NH3 additive in the denitrification process (slip of ammonia inSCR and SNCR units).

Most of the heavy metals considered (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Ni, Pb, Se, Zn, V) are normallyreleased as compounds (e.g. oxides, chlorides) in association with particulates. Only Hg andSe are at least partly present in the vapour phase. Less volatile elements tend to condense ontothe surface of smaller particles in the flue gas stream. Therefore, an enrichment in the finestparticle fractions is observed. The content of heavy metals in coal is normally several ordersof magnitude higher than in oil (except occasionally for Ni and V in heavy fuel oil) and innatural gas. For natural gas only emissions of mercury are relevant. The concentrations arereported to be in the range of 2 - 5 µg/m3 for natural gas /35, 63/. During the combustion ofcoal, particles undergo complex changes which lead to vaporisation of volatile elements. Therate of volatilisation of heavy metal compounds depends on fuel characteristics (e.g.concentrations in coal, fraction of inorganic components, such as calcium) and on technologycharacteristics (e.g. type of boiler, operation mode).

From DBB, all heavy metals of concern are emitted as particulate matter, except Hg and Se.Emissions from lignite fired DBB are potentially lower than from hard coal, as the traceelement content in lignite and the combustion temperatures are lower. In WBB, therecirculation of fly ash is a common operation mode, which creates an important increase inheavy metal concentrations in the raw gas. Heavy metal emissions from FBC units areexpected to be lower due to the lower operating temperatures and a smaller fraction of fineparticles. The addition of limestone in FBC facilities might reduce the emission of someheavy metals, corresponding to an increased retention of heavy metals in the bottom ash. Thiseffect can be partially compensated by the increase in the fraction of fine particulates in theflue gas leading to increased emissions from particulates highly enriched by heavy metals.

High concentrations of As poison denitrification catalysts. Therefore, Selected CatalyticReduction plants (SCR) in a high-dust configuration may require special measures (e.g.reduction of fly ash recirculation). /10, 11, 12/

3.5 Controls

Relevant abatement technologies for SOx, NOx and heavy metals are outlined below.Abatement techniques for gas turbines and stationary engines are treated separately. Averagereduction efficiencies and availabilities of abatement technologies for SOx and NOx aresummarised in Tables 7, 10, and 11. Due to the fact, that most published studies do notclearly distinguish between SOx and SO2, for the following chapters, it can be assumed thatSO2 includes SO3, if not stated otherwise.

3.5.1 Sulphur oxides: Flue Gas Desulphurisation Processes (FGD) (Secondarymeasures) /cf. 18/

FGD processes are designed to remove SO2 from the flue gas of combustion installations.Most processes, like the wet scrubbing process (WS), the spray dryer absorption (SDA), thedry sorbent injection (DSI) and the Walther process (WAP) are based on the reaction of theSO2 with an alkaline agent added as solid or as suspension/solution of the agent in water to



form the respective salts. In secondary reactions also SO3, fluorides and chlorides areremoved. In the case of the DESONOX process (see Section 3.5.4.2), the SO2 is catalyticallyoxidised to SO3 and reacts with water to form sulphuric acid. The Activated Carbon process(see Section 3.5.4.1) and the Wellman-Lord process remove the SO2 to produce a SO2 richgas, which may be further processed to sulphur or sulphuric acid.

3.5.1.1 Lime/Limestone Wet Scrubbing (WS)The pollutants are removed from the flue gas by chemical reactions with an alkaline liquid(suspension of calcium compounds in water). The main product is gypsum. The WS processrepresents about 90 % of the total FGD-equipped electrical capacity installed in EuropeanOECD countries. Facilities are in operation at combustion units using hard coal, lignite andoil with sulphur contents from about 0.8 to more than 3.0 wt.-%. Other fossil fuels (such aspeat) are presently rarely used at combustion plants with a thermal capacity ≥ 300 MW. TheSO2 reduction efficiency is > 90 %.

3.5.1.2 Spray Dryer Absorption (SDA)The SDA process removes the pollutant components from flue gas of fossil fired combustion

units by injection of Ca(OH)2. The process forms a dry by-product (CaSO3.1/2 H2O). This

technology covers about 8 % of the total FGD-equipped electrical capacity installed in theEuropean OECD countries. The SDA process is mostly in use at hard coal fired combustionunits (sulphur content of fuel up to 3 wt.-%). Recent pilot studies have shown that thistechnique is also operational with other fossil fuels (oil, lignite, peat). The SO2 reductionefficiency is > 90 %.

3.5.1.3 Dry Sorbent Injection (DSI, LIFAC Process)The DSI process is based on a gas/solid reaction of the flue gas and a dry sorbent (e.g.lime/limestone, sodium hydrogen carbonate NaHCO3) inside the boiler. There are three

different process types according to the injection point of the additive into the boiler (e.g.primary or secondary air, flame front). The by-products are a dry mixture of the respectivesalts (mostly CaSO4). Only few power plants (some 5 % of the total FGD-equipped electrical

capacity installed in European OECD countries) are equipped with this technology due to itslow SO2 reduction efficiency of 40 - 50 %, which is not sufficient to meet the emissionstandards of some countries. DSI processes are presently in use for hard coal, lignite, oil andcoal/oil fired boilers. The optimum reduction efficiency is obtained for the sulphur contentsof fuel between 0.5 and 1.7 wt.-% (max. 2 wt.-%).

The LIFAC process is an advanced dry sorbent injection process using additional waterinjection in a separate reactor downstream of the boiler, in order to raise the reductionefficiency. Generally, the SO2 reduction efficiency is > 50 %. At present, the LIFAC processis used in one plant in Finland with a SO2 reduction efficiency of already 70 %.

3.5.1.4 Wellman-Lord (WL)The WL process is a regenerable FGD process, which uses the sodium sulphite (Na2SO3)/

sodium bisulphite (NaHSO3) equilibrium in order to remove SO2 from the flue gas. An SO2-

rich gas is obtained, which is used for the production of sulphuric acid. At present only three



installations with a total thermal capacity of 3,300 MW are in use (in Germany), due to thecomplexity of the process and the resulting high investments and operating costs (thistechnology represents about 3 % of the total thermal capacity installed in the European OECDcountries). The WL process is operational with various types of fuel (e.g. hard coal, oil),especially with high sulphur contents (of about 3.5 wt.-%). The SO2 reduction efficiency is> 97 %.

3.5.1.5 Walther Process (WAP)The WAP process uses ammonia water in order to remove SO2 from the flue gas. The by-product is a dry salt mixture of the respective ammonia salts (mainly ammonium sulphate((NH4)2SO4). One reference installation is currently operating in Germany. This process is

operational with all types of fuel. However, the maximum sulphur content should be limitedto 2 wt.-% (due to the increasing formation of ammonia sulphate aerosols). The SO2

reduction efficiency is > 88 %.

3.5.2 Nitrogen oxides: Primary measures - Denitrification techniques /cf. 17, 18, 19/

3.5.2.1 Low NOx burner (LNB)A characteristic of LNB is the staged air to fuel ratio at the burner. Three different technicalmodifications are in use:− Air-staged LNB: An understoichiometric zone is created by a fuel-air mixture and primary

air. An internal recirculation zone occurs due to the swirl of primary air. A burn-out zoneis created due to secondary air fed by air nozzles arranged around the primary air nozzles.

− Air-staged LNB with flue gas recirculation (FGR): The basic function is similar to air-staged LNB. The distances between the primary and secondary nozzles are greater,therefore, a flue gas layer is formed. As a result, the residence time in the reducingatmosphere increases and the oxygen concentration decreases.

− Air/Fuel staged LNB: An additional reduction zone around the primary zone is achievedby the extremely overstoichiometric addition of secondary fuel around the secondaryflame.

LNB is operational with all fuels and all types of burners. The NOx reduction efficiency forcoal fired boilers varies between 10 and 30 % (see Table 10).

3.5.2.2 Staged Air Supply (SAS)Staged air means the creation of two divided combustion zones - a primary zone with a lackof oxygen and a burn-out zone with excess air. SAS covers the low excess air (LEA), burnersout of service (BOOS) and biased burner firing (BBF) techniques:

− Low excess air (LEA) means reduction of the oxygen content in the primary combustionzone of the burners. When firing hard coal, experience has shown that the generallimitations are fouling and corrosion, caused by the reducing atmosphere and incompleteburn-out. When firing gas, the reduction efficiency is limited by the CO formed. LEA ismore suitable for lignite and often used for retrofitting combustion plants. For oil firedboilers a reduction efficiency of 20 % has been achieved.



− Burners out of service (BOOS) means that the lower burner row(s) in the boiler operateunder a lack of oxygen (fuel rich), the upper burners are not in use. This technology is inparticular suitable for older installations, but the thermal capacity of the boiler decreasesby about 15 - 20 %.

− Biased burner firing (BBF) means that the lower burner rows in the boiler operate under alack of oxygen (fuel rich) and the upper burners with an excess of oxygen. The boilerefficiency is less compared to BOOS and the NOx reduction is also lower.

The NOx reduction efficiency for coal fired boilers varies between 10 and 40 % (seeTable 10).

3.5.2.3 Overfire Air (OFA)All burner rows in the boiler operate with a lack of oxygen. The combustion air is partly(5 - 20 %) injected through separate ports located above the top burner row in the boiler. OFAis operational with most fuels and most types of boilers. For gas fired boilers a reductionefficiency of 10 - 30 % and for oil fired boilers 10 - 40 % has been achieved. The NOx

reduction efficiency for coal fired boilers varies between 10 and 40 % (see Table 10).

3.5.2.4 Flue Gas Recirculation (FGR)The recirculation of flue gas into the combustion air is an efficient NOx abatement method forfiring modes with high combustion temperatures, such as wet bottom boilers and especiallyfor gas and oil fired boilers.

The recirculated flue gas can be added to the secondary or primary air. In the first case, theflame core is not affected and the only effect is a reduction of the flame temperature, which isfavourable for thermal-NOx abatement. The influence on dry bottom boilers is thus verylimited, considering the fact that about 80 % of the NOx formed originates from fuel boundnitrogen; FGR can be used as an additional measure. A more efficient method is theintroduction of flue gas into the primary air of an unstaged burner. High reduction efficienciesof FGR in the primary flow (15 - 20 %) have been achieved in gas and oil fired boilers. TheNOx reduction efficiency for coal fired boilers varies between 5 and 25 % (see Table 10).

3.5.2.5 Split Primary Flow (SPF)Split primary flow means fuel staging in the furnace. This technique involves injecting fuelinto the furnace above the main combustion zone, thereby producing a secondunderstoichiometric combustion zone. In the primary zone of the boiler the main fuel is burntunder fuel-lean conditions. This zone is followed by a secondary zone with a reducingatmosphere, into which the secondary fuel is injected. Finally, secondary air is injected intothe burn-out zone of the boiler. This reburning technique can, in principle, be used for alltypes of fossil fuel fired boilers and in combination with low NOx combustion techniques forthe primary fuels. When nitrogen is present in the reburning fuel, a part of it will be convertedinto NOx in the burn-out zone. Therefore, natural gas is the most appropriate reburning fuel.NOx reduction efficiencies have not been yet reported.



3.5.3 Nitrogen oxides: Secondary measures - Denitrification Processes /cf. 18, 19/

3.5.3.1 Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction (SNCR)The reduction of nitrogen oxides in the flue gas is based on the selective reaction of NOx withinjected ammonia, urea or caustic ammonia to form nitrogen and water. The SNCR processhas been implemented at several installations (e.g. in Germany, in Austria and in Sweden)and has in principle proved to be operational with various types of fuels. The NOx reductionefficiency is about 50 %, in some installations up to 80 %.

3.5.3.2 Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR)The reduction of nitrogen oxides is based on selective reactions with injected additives in thepresence of a catalyst. The additives used are mostly gaseous ammonia, but also liquid causticammonia or urea. The SCR technology accounts for about 95 % of all denitrificationprocesses. SCR is mostly used for hard coal. For brown coal, lower combustion temperatureslead to lower NOx formation, so that primary measures fulfil the emission reductionrequirements. Several heavy metals in the flue gas can cause rapid deactivation of thecatalyst. The NOx reduction efficiency varies between 70 and 90 %.

3.5.4 Nitrogen oxides and sulphur oxides: Simultaneous Processes /18, 19/

3.5.4.1 Activated Carbon Process (AC)The AC process is a dry process for simultaneous SO2 and NOx removal based on theadsorption of the pollutants in a moving bed filter of activated carbon. The sulphur oxidesundergo catalytic oxidation with the moisture in the flue gas to form sulphuric acid. NO2 iscompletely reduced to N2; NO reacts catalytically with the ammonia injected and forms N2

and H2O. The AC process has been installed at four power plants in Germany (in two casesdownstream of an SDA process). The sulphur content in the fuel used should not exceed 2.3wt.-%. The SO2 reduction efficiency is > 95 %, the NOx reduction efficiency is > 70 %.

3.5.4.2 DESONOX Process/SNOX Process (DESONOX)The purification of the flue gas by the DESONOX process is based on the simultaneouscatalytic reduction of nitrogen oxides (NOx) to nitrogen (N2) and water (H2O) and on thecatalytic oxidation of sulphur dioxide (SO2) to sulphur trioxide (SO3). The by-product issulphuric acid. The process has been installed at one power plant in Germany, where hardcoal is used with a sulphur content of about 1 wt.-%. The concentration of catalyst toxics(mainly arsenic, but also chromium, selenium etc.) has to be taken into account. The SO2

reduction efficiency is up to 95 %, the NOx reduction efficiency is also up to 95 %.

The SNOX process works on the same basic principle as the DESONOX process, with themain difference that reduction and oxidation take place in two separate reaction towers. TheSNOX process has been applied at one Danish power plant. No reduction efficiency has beenreported yet. The SNOX process is also known as a combination of the Topsøe WSA-2process and the SCR process.



3.5.5 Heavy metals: Secondary measures /12, 20, 21, 22, 23/

Heavy metal emissions are mainly reduced by dust control equipment. Particulate controlsystems, which are used in coal-fired power plants, are cyclones, wet scrubbers, electrostaticprecipitators (ESP), and fabric filters. In most power plants 99 % of the particulates areremoved from the flue gases by using ESP or fabric filters. The latter are more efficient incontrolling fine particulate matter; wet scrubbers and cyclones are less efficient.

The reduction efficiency of ESP for most elements in the solid state is > 99 %. Only for somehigher volatile elements, such as Cd, Pb, Zn and Se, is the reduction efficiency less, but itremains above 90 %. The reduction efficiency of an ESP for Hg depends on the operatingtemperature of the ESP. A cold-side ESP operating at about 140 °C is estimated to have anaverage Hg reduction efficiency of about 35 %.

The influence of FGD- and DeNOx-units on heavy metal emissions has been investigatedmainly in the frame of mass balance studies. WS-FGD-units remove a further fraction ofparticulate matter in flue gas in addition to dust control. Particle bound elements are removedby FGD-units with an efficiency of about 90 %. In FGD-units, in particular WS-units, thegaseous compounds can additionally condense on particulate matter, which are mainlyremoved in the prescrubber. With regard to gaseous elements, various studies have shownreduction efficiencies of 30 - 50 % for Hg and 60 - 75 % for Se. Lime contributes over 90 %of the input of As, Cd, Pb and Zn to the FGD.

The abatement of Hg emissions is influenced indirectly by DeNOx-units. A high dust SCR-unit improves Hg removal in a subsequent FGD-unit using a lime scrubbing system. TheSCR-unit increases the share of ionic mercury (HgCl2) to up to 95 %, which can be washedout in the prescrubber of the FGD-unit. A study in the Netherlands found no influence ofLNB on heavy metal emissions.

3.5.6 Gas turbines /cf. 68, 69/

For gas turbines mainly NOx emissions are of most relevance. Primary measures for NOxreduction are the following: dry controls (e.g. overstoichiometric combustion in a dry lowNOx burner with η = 0.6 - 0.8, which is a relatively new development as a primary measure)

and wet controls (injection of water and/or steam with η ≥ 0.6 /114/) in order to regulate thecombustion temperature. For large gas turbines secondary measures are also installed such asSelective Catalytic Reduction (SCR).

3.5.7 Stationary engines /cf. 70/

For spark-ignition engines the main pollutants emitted are NOx, CO and unburnedhydrocarbons (VOC). For diesel engines sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions have also to beconsidered. Emissions of soot also contribute to emissions of heavy metals and persistentorganic pollutants, but at this stage insufficient information is available /35/.

Primary measures are installed to optimise combustion conditions (air ratio, reduced load,water injection, exhaust-gas recirculation, optimised combustion chamber etc.). Reductionefficiencies can be given e.g. for exhaust gas recirculation from 6.5 to 12 % and for internal



exhaust gas recirculation from 4 to 37 %. External exhaust gas recirculation (turbo chargedmodels) can have reductions of NOx varying from 25 to 34 %. /cf. 114/

Secondary measures are installed, if the emission thresholds cannot be met by adjustments tothe engine itself. The following methods are used depending on the air ratio λ:

λ = 1 Reduction of NOx, CO and VOC by using a three-way catalytic converter

(NSCR),

λ > 1 Reduction of NOx by Selective Catalytic Reduction with NH3 (SCR),

Reduction of other emissions (CO, VOC) using oxidation catalytic converter(NSCR).

Typical conversion rates of NOx range from 80 to 95 % with corresponding decreases in COand VOC. Depending on the system design, NOx removal of 80 up to 90 % is achievable./114/

4 SIMPLER METHODOLOGY

4.1 General

4.1.1 General / specified emission factors

Here “simpler methodology“ refers to the calculation of emissions, based on emission factorsand activities. The simpler methodology should only be used in cases where no measureddata is available. The simpler methodology covers all relevant pollutants (SO2, NOx,NMVOC, CH4, CO, CO2, N2O, NH3, heavy metals). Special emphasis is put on the pollutantsSOx, NOx and heavy metals, due to the significant contribution of combustion plants as pointsources to the total emissions of these pollutants.

A combustion plant can be treated either as a whole (irrespective of kind/size of individualboilers) or on a boiler-by-boiler level. Differences in design and operation of boilers, in fuelsused and/or controls installed require different emission factors. The same applies to gasturbines and stationary engines.

The annual emission E is derived from an activity A and a factor which determines theirlinear relation (see Equation (1)):

E EF Ai i= ⋅ (1)

Ei annual emission of pollutant i

EFi emission factor of pollutant i

A activity rate

The activity rate A and the emission factor EFi have to be determined on the same level ofaggregation by using available data (e.g. fuel consumption) (see Section 6). For the activityrate A, the energy input in [GJ] should be used, but in principle other relations are alsoapplicable.

Two different approaches in order to obtain the emission factor EFi are proposed:



- General emission factor EFGi

The general emission factor is a mean value for defined categories of boilers taking intoaccount abatement measures (primary and secondary). A general emission factor is only

related to the type of fuel used and is applicable for all pollutants considered, except of SO25.

It should only be used where no technique specific data are available (only as a makeshift).

- Specified emission factor EFRi

The specified emission factor is an individually determined value for boilers taking intoaccount abatement measures (primary and secondary). A specified emission factor is relatedto individual fuel characteristics (e.g. sulphur content of fuel) and to technology specificparameters. The following sections provide determination procedures for suitable specifiedemission factors for the pollutants NOx, SOx and heavy metals.

In principle, plant specific data should be used, if available, for the determination of emissionfactors. The following Sections 4.1 to 4.8 give recommendations for the estimation and theuse of general and specified emission factors as given in Table 4.

Table 4: Applicability of general emission factors EFGi and specified emission factors EFRi

Pollutant General emission factorEFGi

Specified emission factorEFRi

SOx - +

NOx + ++1)

Heavy metals + ++2)

NMVOC, CH4, CO,CO2, N2O, NH3

+ *

+ : possible, but not recommended methodology; ++ : possible and recommended methodology;

- : not appropriate; * : not available1) detailed calculation schemes are given for pulverised coal combustion2) detailed calculation schemes are given for coal combustion

An accurate determination of full load emissions can only be obtained by using specifiedemission factors. For the calculation of specified SOx and NOx emission factors for pulverisedcoal combustion, a computer programme has been developed (see Annexes 2 - 6 andAnnex 14).

If not stated otherwise, the general and specified emission factors presented refer to full loadconditions. Start-up emissions have to be considered separately (see Section 4.1.2).

5 For the appropriate determination of SO2 emissions the sulphur content of fuel is required. Therefore, the

specified emission factor approach has to be applied.



4.1.2 Start-up dependence

Start-up emissions depend on the load design of the plant and on the type of start-up (seeTables 5 and 6). A plant can be designed for:

- peak load: to meet the short-term energy demand,

- middle load: to meet the energy demand on working days,

- base load: continuous operation.

Table 5: Load design and start-ups per year

Load design Start-ups per year Full load hours per year Emission

range value range value relevance2)

Peak load1) 150 - 500 200 1,000 - 2,500 2,000 x1)

Middle load 50 - 250 150 3,000 - 5,000 4,000 xxx

Base load 10 - 20 15 6,000 - 8,000 7,000 x1) For peak load often high-quality fuels (e.g. gas, oil) and often gas turbines are used.2) x: low; xxx: high.

Table 6: Status of the boiler at starting time for a conventional power plant

Type of start-up Time of stand-still [h] /65/

Status ofthe boiler

Frequency2) Emissionrelevance2)

Hot-start < 8 hot xxx x

Warm-start 8 - ca. 50 warm xx xx

Cold-start > 50 cold x1) xxx1) normally once a year, only for maintenance.2) x: low; xx: medium; xxx: high.

In order to take into consideration the relevance of start-up emissions, a detailed investigationhas been carried out. There, start-up emissions and start-up emission factors have beendetermined for different types of boilers (DBB, WBB, gas-fired boiler, see Annex 15). Start-up emissions are only relevant if secondary measures are installed.

By taking into account boiler characteristics as given in Annex 15, the following generaltrends of start-up emissions of SOx, NOx and CO on the type of fuel and type of boiler areobtained (based on /116/).

− For the boilers considered in the detailed investigation it has been found that start-upemissions for the combustion of coal are significantly higher than for the combustion ofgas.

− Start-up emissions are higher for dry bottom boilers than for wet bottom boilers and gasboilers.



In the following sections, start-up emissions and start-up emission factors derived frommeasured data are presented as ratios:

F EF EFEF A V= / (2)

FEF ratio of start-up and full load emission factors [ ]

EFA emission factor at start-up period [g/GJ]

EFv emission factor at full load conditions [g/GJ]

F E EE A V= / (3)

FE ratio of start-up and full load emissions [ ]

EA emission during start-up period (see Section 3.2) [Mg]

Ev emission for full load conditions during start-up period [Mg]

Start-up emissions and full load emissions are related to comparable periods; the energy input(fuel consumption) during the start-up period is lower than during full load operation. Theemission factor ratio FEF is often higher than the emission ratio FE. Increased specificemissions during the start-up period were found to be compensated to a high degree by thelower fuel consumption. Further pollutant specific results are given in the Sections 4.2 - 4.9.

If start-up emissions are taken into account the corresponding activity rates have to bedetermined as follows:

A = Afull load + Acold + Awarm + Ahot (4a)

A activity rate within the period considered [GJ]

Afull load activity rate for full load operation periods [GJ]

Acold activity rate for cold start periods [GJ]

Awarm activity rate for warm start periods [GJ]

Ahot activity rate for hot start periods [GJ]

Each sub-activity (e.g. Acold) has to be determined separately by totalling the thermal energyinput for the respective periods e.g. cold start periods.

Accordingly, Equation (1) becomes:

E = EF (A F A F A F A ) 10Vfull load cold

EFcold warm

EFwarm hot

EFhot

-6⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ ⋅ (4b)

E emission within the period considered [Mg]

EFV emission factor at full load operation conditions [g/GJ]

Fcold warm hotEF

/ / ratio of start-up (cold/warm/hot start) to full load emission factor [ ]

Afull load/cold/... activity rates at full load operation/cold start/... [GJ]

The emission factor at full load conditions EFV can be approximated by using the emissionfactors given in Tables 24 and 25 (for NOx) and Table 28 (for CO); SO2 emission factors canbe determined as given in Equation (5). A correction factor for the annual emission can beobtained by calculating the ratio of the annual emissions resulting from Equation (4b) to thosedetermined without consideration of start-up emissions.



4.1.3 Load dependence

A load dependence of emissions has only been found for NOx emissions released from oldertypes of boiler (see Section 4.3).

4.2 SO2 emission factors

For SO2, only specified emission factors EFRSO2 are recommended here. For the determination

of specified SO2 emission factors the following general equation should be used (foremissions of SO3 see Section 9):

EF CHR S S

uSO fuel2

2 11

10 16= ⋅ ⋅ − ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ − ⋅( ) ( )secα η β (5)

EFRSO2specified emission factor [g/GJ]

CSfuelsulphur content in fuel [kg/kg]

αs sulphur retention in ash [ ]

Hu lower heating value of fuel [MJ/kg]

ηsec reduction efficiency of secondary measure [ ]

β availability of secondary measure [ ]

Equation (5) can be used for all fuels, but not all parameters may be of relevance for certainfuels (e.g. αs for gas). Default values for reduction efficiencies and availabilities of secondarymeasures installed are presented in Table 7. The technologies listed in Table 7 are mainlyinstalled in the case of coal-fired boilers, but they can also be applied when burning otherfuels.

Table 7: Default values for secondary measures for SO2 reduction (all fuels) /18, 19/

No. Type ofsecondarymeasure

Reductionefficiencyηsec [ ]

Availability

β [ ]

1 WS 0.90 0.99

2 SDA 0.90 0.99

3 DSI 0.45 0.98

4 LIFAC 0.70 0.98

5 WL 0.97 0.99

6 WAP 0.88 0.99

7 AC 0.95 0.99

8 DESONOX 0.95 0.99


SO2 emission factors for coal fired boilers can be calculated by using Equation (5). If someinput data are not available, provided default values based on literature data can be used:



- Cs,fuel see Annexes 7 and 8, Table 23,- αs see Table 8,- ηsec and β see Table 7,- Hu see Annexes 7 and 8.

For further details concerning the calculation of SO2 emission factors, see Annexes 2(flowsheet of the computer programme) and 3 (description of the computer programme).Default values for sulphur retention in ash for coal fired boilers are presented in Table 8.

Table 8: Default values for the sulphur retention in ash (αs) for pulverised coal fired boilers

Type of boiler αS [ ]

Hard coal Brown coal

DBB 0.05 0.31)

WBB 0.01 -1) average value; in practice, a range of 0.05 - 0.60 can occur (e.g. in the Czech Republic 0.05 is used)

Emission factors obtained by using Equation (5) are related to full load conditions; start-upemissions are not taken into account. If a flue gas desulphurisation unit is installed, start-upemissions should be considered as given in Section 4.1.2. The relevance of start-up emissionsof SO2 depends strongly on the following parameters:

- the type of fuel (e.g. SOx emissions are directly related to the fuel sulphur content),

- the status of the boiler at starting time (hot, warm or cold start, see also Table 6),

- start-up of the flue gas desulphurisation unit (FGD direct or in by-pass configuration),

- limit for SOx emissions, which has to be met (boiler specific limits can be set up belowthe demands of the LCP Directive).

For the combustion of coal in dry bottom boilers, the following ranges and values of FEF, FE

have been obtained within the investigation outlined in Annex 15:

Table 9: Ratios of start-up to full load emission factors FEF and ratios of start-up to full loademissions FE for SO2 for dry bottom boilers

Ratio of start-up to full loademission factors FEF [ ]

Ratio of start-up to full loademissions FE [ ]

Range 3 - max. 16 1 - max. 4

Values for directstart-up of the FGD

FcoldEF : 5

FwarmEF : 5

FhotEF : 4

FcoldE : 1

FwarmE : 1

FhotE : 1



Ratio of start-up to full loademission factors FEF [ ]


Range 3 - max. 16 1 - max. 4

Values for by-passstart-up of the FGD

FcoldEF : 8.5 - 16

FwarmEF : 5 - 14.5

FhotEF : 5 - 5.5

FcoldE : 2 - 4.5

FwarmE : 1 - 3.5

FhotE : 1.5

Fcold warm hotEF

, , Ratio of start-up to full load emission factors for cold, warm or hot start-ups (see also

Table 6)

Fcold warm hotE

, , Ratio of start-up to full load emissions for cold, warm or hot start-ups (see also Table 6)

The values from the direct start-up of the FGD show, that start-up emissions of SO2 are notrelevant (ratio FE of ca. 1). In the case of a by-pass start-up of the FGD, start-up emissions ofSO2 are significant for hot, warm and cold starts; start-up emissions can be up to 4 timeshigher than emissions in a comparable full load time span (based on /116/).

4.2.2 Combustion of other fuels (biomass, waste, liquid fuels, gaseous fuels)

SO2 emissions are directly related to the sulphur content of biomass, waste, liquid andgaseous fuels (see Equation (5)). The sulphur retention in ash αs is not relevant. The reductionefficiency ηsec and the availability β of installed secondary measures have to be taken intoaccount (in particular for the combustion of waste). Default values for η and β are given inTable 7. Sulphur contents of different fuels are given in Table 23 and in Annexes 7 and 8.

4.3 NOx emission factors

For the determination of NOx emissions, general as well as specified NOx emission factorscan be used. Emission factors are listed in Tables 24 and 25 depending on installed capacity,type of boiler, primary measures and type of fuel used.

4.3.1 Combustion of pulverised coal

Specified NOx emission factors can be calculated individually for pulverised coal firedboilers. Due to the complex reaction mechanism of NOx formation (see also Section 3.4) anestimate of specified NOx emission factors can only be made on the basis of empiricalrelations as given in Equation (6). The decisive step in Equation (6) is the undisturbed NOx

formation (without primary measures) inside the boiler (CNO boiler2.). CNO boiler2.

is determined by an

empirical equation depending on fuel parameters only, as described in Annex 5.

EF CHR NO boiler prim

uNO2 2

11

10 16= ⋅ − ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ −, sec( ) ( )η η β (6)

EFRNO2specified emission factor [g/GJ]



CNO boiler2.total content of nitrogen dioxide formed in the boiler without taking into account primary reduction

measures (in mass NO2/mass fuel [kg/kg])6

ηprim reduction efficiency of primary measures [ ]



β availability of secondary measure

For further details concerning the calculation of specified NO2 emission factors see Annexes4 (flowsheet of the computer programme) and 5 (description of the computer programme).

If some input data are not available, default values based on literature data are provided for:

- CN, fuel, content of fuel-nitrogen, see Annexes 7 and 8,- Cvolatiles, content of volatiles in the fuel, see Annexes 7 and 8,- ηprim see Table 10,- ηsec and β see Table 11,- Hu see Annexes 7 and 8.

Default values for the reduction efficiency of primary measures are presented in the followingTables 10 and 11.

6 Note: The computer programme, which is described in Annex 5, provides CNO2 boiler as (mass pollutant/mass

flue gas [kg/kg]).



Table 10:Reduction efficiencies for selected primary measures for NOx emissions in coal

fired boilers /17, 18, 19, 28, 31, 32, 33, 34, 53/ (value means recommended value)

Reduction efficiency DBB η [ ] Reduction efficiencyWBB η [ ]

Type of primary Hard coal Lignite Hard coal

measure1) range value3) range value3) range value3)

no measure4) 0 0 0 0 0 0

LNB 0.10 - 0.30 0.20 0.10 - 0.30 0.20 0.10 - 0.30 0.20

SAS 0.10 - 0.40 0.30 0.10 - 0.40 0.30 0.10 - 0.40 0.30

OFA 0.10 - 0.40 0.30 0.10 - 0.35 0.25 0.10 - 0.35 0.25

FGR 0.05 - 0.15 0.10 0.05 - 0.20 0.15 0.10 - 0.25 0.20

LNB/SAS 0.20 - 0.60 0.45 0.20 - 0.60 0.45 0.20 - 0.60 0.45

LNB/OFA 0.20 - 0.60 0.45 0.20 - 0.55 0.40 0.20 - 0.55 0.40

LNB/FGR 0.15 - 0.40 0.30 0.15 - 0.45 0.30 0.20 - 0.50 0.35

SAS/OFA 0.20 - 0.65 0.50 0.20 - 0.60 0.40 0.20 - 0.60 0.40

SAS/FGR 0.15 - 0.50 0.40 0.15 - 0.50 0.40 0.20 - 0.55 0.45

OFA/FGR 0.15 - 0.50 0.40 0.15 - 0.50 0.35 0.20 - 0.50 0.40

LNB/SAS/OFA 0.30 - 0.75 0.60 0.30 - 0.75 0.60 0.30 - 0.75 0.60

LNB/SAS/FGR 0.25 - 0.65 0.50 0.25 - 0.70 0.50 0.30 - 0.70 0.55

LNB/OFA/FGR 0.25 - 0.65 0.50 0.25 - 0.65 0.50 0.30 - 0.65 0.50

old installation/

optimised0.15 0.15 0.15

old installation/

retrofitted2)0.50 0.50 0.50

new installation2) 0.40 0.40 0.401)Selection from the DECOF database developed by and available at the Institute for Industrial

Production (IIP).2) Recommended values, when no information concerning the type of primary measure is available.3) Default values used in the computer programme.4) No primary measures are installed. This case is mainly relevant for old installations.



Table 11:Default values for reduction efficiency and availability of secondary measures forNOx reduction /18, 19/ (all fuels)

No. Type of secondary

measure

Reduction efficiencyηsec [ ]

Availabilityβ [ ]

1 SNCR 0.50 0.99

2 SCR 0.80 0.99

3 AC 0.70 0.99

4 DESONOX 0.95 0.99

Emission factors of NO2 for different coal compositions have been calculated by using defaultvalues as given above and are listed in Table 25.

The load dependence of NOx emissions can be split into two different phenomena (see

Sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3):

a) Load variations during normal operation:Load variations are discussed very controversially in the literature. Often a strongcorrelation of NOx emissions and load is reported. Load corrections, e.g. as given in /66/,

may be appropriate for older types of boilers.

For boilers of modern design, with optimised combustion conditions e.g. by primarymeasures, only a negligible load dependence has been reported /64/. This is explained bythe fact that for modern boilers (with primary measures) under reduced load conditions anoverstoichiometric air ratio is applied in order to achieve an acceptable burning out of thefuel, which leads to NOx emission factors similar to those obtained under full loadconditions. Therefore, for boilers of modern design no load correction is proposed.

For older boilers (without primary measures) a load dependent emission factor can becalculated according to Equation (7), which has been derived for German dry bottomboilers (combustion of hard coal) /71/:

EF = 1,147 + 0.47 ⋅ L (7)

EF emission factor [g/MWh]7

L actual load [MW]

At this stage, no general approach is available for estimating the load dependence of NOx

emissions. However, a load correction factor can be obtained by using a ratio betweenreduced load and full load emission factors:

7 1 MWh = 3.6 GJ



kEF

EF

L

Lload

duced load

Vno al

= = + ⋅+ ⋅

Re

min

, .

, .

1 147 0 47

1 147 0 47(8)

kload ratio of reduced load to full load emission factor [ ]

EFReduced load emission factor for reduced load conditions [g/MWh]6

EFV emission factor for full load conditions [g/MWh]6

L actual load [MW]

Lnominal nominal load [MW]

Figure 1.1 gives a graphic presentation of the results of Equation (8):

0,85

0,9

0,95

1

60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Percent of full load

klo

ad

300 MW

500 MW

1000 MW

Thermal Capacity

Figure 1.1: Variation of kload with load

If reduced load operation is taken into account the corresponding activity rates have to bedetermined as follows:

A = Afull load + Aload 1 + Aload 2 + ... (9a)


Afull load activity rate for full load operation periods [GJ]

A load i activity rate for reduced load operation periods at level i [GJ]

Each sub-activity (e.g. Aload 1) has to be determined separately by totalling the thermalenergy input for the respective periods of operation e.g. at load level 1.

kload



Emissions are calculated according to Equation (9b):

E EF A k A k AVfull load

load 1load 1

load 2load 2= ⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ −( ...) 10 6 (9b)


EFV emission factor at full load conditions [g/GJ]

Aload i activity rates at load level i [GJ]

kload i ratio of reduced load to full load emission factor at load level i [ ]

If secondary measures are installed, no load correction for NOx emissions has to be taken

into account.

b) Load variations with respect to start-up behaviour:

Emission factors for NOx, as given in Tables 24 and 25, are related to full load conditions;start-up emissions are not taken into account. If an SCR is installed, start-up emissionsshould be considered as given in Section 4.1.2. The relevance of start-up emissions of NOx

depends strongly on the following parameters:

- the type of boiler (e.g. NOx emissions released by wet bottom boilers are always higherthan those by dry bottom boilers, due to higher combustion temperatures),

- the type of fuel used (e.g. fuel nitrogen also contributes to the formation of NOx),

- the status of the boiler at starting time (hot, warm or cold start),

- the specifications of any individual start-up, such as

-- the duration and the velocity of start-up,

-- the load level (reduced load or full load),

-- the configuration of secondary measures (e.g. the start-up time of the high-dust-configurations (SCR-precipitator-FGD) depends on the boiler load, due to the factthat the SCR catalyst is directly heated by the flue gas; tail-end-configurations(precipitator-FGD-SCR) can have shorter start-up times, due to the fact that the SCRcatalyst can be preheated by an additional furnace),

-- emission standards, which have to be met (boiler-specific emission standards can beset up below the demands of the LCP Directive).

In the investigation mentioned in Annex 15 the measured data from different boilers havebeen analysed. For the combustion of coal the following ratios have been obtained (basedon /116/):

- For the combustion of coal in dry bottom boilers the following ranges and values can begiven:



Table 12: Ratios of start-up to full load emission factors FEF and ratios of start-up to fullload emissions FE for NO2 for dry bottom boilers

Ratio of start-up to full loademissions factors FEF [ ]


Range 2 - max. 6 1 - 2

Values forDBB

F : 3.5 6

F : 3 6.5

F : 2.5 3

cold EF

warmEF

hotEF

−

−

−

F : .5

F : 1

F :

cold E

warmE

hotE

1 2

2

1 1 5

−

−

− .

Fcold warm hotEF


Table 6)

Fcold warm hotE


The investigation revealed that start-up emissions of NO2 were mostly higher thanemissions under full load conditions. There is a dependence between start-up emissions(see Section 3.2) and the time of standstill of the boiler: cold starts showed emissionsabout 2 times higher, warm starts about 1 up to 2 times higher and hot starts about 1 upto 1.5 higher than at full load conditions. Start-up emission factors can be up to 6 timeshigher than full load emission factors. At the investigated boilers the SCR was installedin a high-dust configuration.

- For the combustion of coal in wet bottom boilers (SCR in tail-end configuration) it wasfound that start-up emissions were not higher than full load emissions (ratio of ≤1).However, this consideration is based on data of only two boilers. Measured data for hotstarts was not available.

NOx emissions, in particular for the combustion of coal in DBB, might be underestimated,if these effects are not taken into account.

4.3.2 Combustion of other fuels (biomass, waste, liquid fuels, gaseous fuels)

The emission calculation is based on Equation (1). During the combustion of solid and liquidfuels, fuel-NO and thermal-NO are formed. For gaseous fuels only thermal-NOx is relevant,as gaseous fuels do not contain any fuel-nitrogen. For gaseous fuels the emission reduction ismainly achieved by primary measures. There are several biomass-fuelled plants with SNCRin Sweden.

The analysis of emission data from a gas fired boiler, equipped with an SCR, revealed thatstart-up emissions are not of relevance (ratios FE were below 1) (based on /116/).

4.4 NMVOC/CH4 emission factors

The emission calculation is based on Equation (1). Fuel and technique specific emissionfactors are given in Tables 26 and 27.



4.5 CO emission factors

The emission calculation is based on Equation (1). Fuel and technique specific emissionfactors are given in Table 28 (full load conditions); start-up emissions are not taken intoaccount. CO emissions at starting time and under full load conditions are mainly influencedby the combustion conditions (oxygen availability, oil spraying etc.). In the detailedinvestigation start-up emissions for CO have only been found to be relevant for thecombustion of coal. Start-up emissions for CO are determined for the time when burnersswitch-on up to the time when the boiler operates on minimum load.

For the combustion of coal and gas the following results have been obtained (based on /116/see also Section 4.1.2):

- For the combustion of coal in dry bottom boilers the following ranges can be given:

Table 13: Ratios of start-up to full load emission factors FEF and ratios of start-up to fullload emissions FE for CO for dry bottom boilers

Ratios for start-up to full loademission factors FEF [ ]

Ratios for start-up to full loademissions FE [ ]

Range 0.5 - 3.5 0.1 - 0.7

Values for DBB F : .5

F : 1

F : .5

cold EF

warmEF

hotEF

1 3 5

0

− . F : .4

F : 0.2

F : .1

cold E

warmE

hotE

0 0 7

0 7

0

−

−

.

.

Fcold warm hotEF


Table 6)

Fcold warm hotE


The values in Table 13 show that start-up emissions for CO for DBB are lower than full loademissions for the boilers considered.

- Start-up emissions from wet bottom boilers can be up to 1.2 times higher than full loademissions for cold starts (FEF = 4); they are lower for warm starts (FE = 0.3; FEF = 0.8).

- Start-up emissions of CO from gas boilers are also negligible.

4.6 CO2 emission factors

The emission calculation is based on Equation (1). Fuel specific emission factors are given inTable 29. For the determination of specified CO2 emission factors, the following generalEquation (10) can be used:



EF C 1H

10R Cfuel u

6

CO2= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅44

12ε (10)

EFRCO2specified emission factor [g/GJ]

CCfuelcarbon content of fuel (in mass C/mass fuel [kg/kg])

ε fraction of carbon oxidised [ ]


Default values for carbon content and lower heating value of different coals, available on theworld market, are given in Annexes 7 and 8. The fraction of carbon oxidised (ε) is defined asthe main part of carbon which is oxidised to CO2; small amounts of carbon may remainunoxidised. Default values for ε according to IPCC /61/ are for liquid fuels 0.99, for solidfuels 0.98 and for gaseous fuels 0.995. In this approach it is assumed that the only product ofthe oxidation is CO2. Nevertheless, double counting of CO2 has to be avoided: products ofincomplete oxidation, like CO, must not be converted into CO2.

The IPCC/OECD presented an overall model (the so-called reference approach) speciallydesigned for the calculation of CO2 emissions on a national level (not on a plant level) /61/.This methodology is based on national energy balances.

4.7 N2O emission factors

The emission calculation is based on Equation (1). The fuel and technique specific emissionfactors are given in Table 30. At this stage, several pilot studies using measured data aredescribed in the literature /13, 14, 25, 26, 27/. A complete list of influencing parameters hasnot yet been identified.

4.8 NH3 emission factors

Emission factors referring to the energy input are not yet available. The available data forammonia slip at SCR/SNCR installations are based on measurements and are related to theflue gas volume: SCR/SNCR installations are often designed for an ammonia slip of about 5ppm (3.8 mg NH3/m

3 flue gas) /45, 62/. The ammonia slip at SCR and SNCR installationsincreases with an increasing NH3/NOx ratio, but also with a decreasing catalyst activity.

4.9 Heavy metal emission factors

For heavy metals, general and specified emission factors can be used. Emission factors,depending on the fuel used and the technique installed, are given in Table 31.

The IPCC/OECD presented an overall model (the so-called reference approach) speciallydesigned for the calculation of CO2 emissions on a national level (not on a plant level) /61/.This methodology is based on national energy balances.




For an individual determination of specific heavy metal emission factors, three differentmethodologies can be applied, taking into account:

- fuel composition (particle-bound and gaseous emissions),

- fly ash composition (particle-bound emissions),

- fly ash concentration in clean gas (particle-bound emissions).

The choice of the methodology depends on data availability.

4.9.1.1 Calculation of specified emission factors based on fuel composition /cf. 35/Emissions of heavy metals associated with particulate matter and gaseous emissions areassessed subsequently as given in Equation (11). The enrichment behaviour of heavy metalswith regard to fine particles is taken into account as an enrichment factor (see alsoSection 3.4). Gaseous emissions have to be taken into account additionally in the case ofarsenic, mercury and selenium.

EF C f f C fR HM a e p HM g gHM coal coal= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ − + ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ −− −10 1 10 12 2( ) ( )η η (11)

EFR HMspecified emission factor of heavy metal (in mass pollutant/mass coal [g/Mg])

CHMcoalconcentration of heavy metal in coal [mg/kg]

fa fraction of ash leaving the combustion chamber as particulate matter [wt.-%]

fe enrichment factor [ ]

fg fraction of heavy metal emitted in gaseous form [wt.-%]

ηp efficiency of the dust control equipment [ ]

ηg efficiency of the emission control equipment with regard to gaseous heavy metals [ ]

The characteristics of fuel and technology are taken into account by fa and fe and thefollowing default values are proposed:

Table 14:Default values for fa for different combustion technologies (based on /35/)

Type of boiler fa [wt.-%]

DBB (Pulverised coal) 80

Grate firing 50

Fluidised bed 15



Table 15:Default values for fe for different heavy metals released by the combustion of coal(based on /35/)

Heavy metal fe [ ]

range value1)

Arsenic 4.5 - 7.5 5.5

Cadmium 6 - 9 7

Copper 1.5 - 3 2.3

Chromium 0.8 - 1.3 1.0

Nickel 1.5 - 5 3.3

Lead 4 - 10 6

Selenium 4 - 12 7.5

Zinc 5 - 9 71) Recommended value, if no other information is available.

Gaseous emissions (arsenic, mercury and selenium) are calculated from the heavy metalcontent in coal; the fraction emitted in gaseous form is given in Table 16. The efficiency ofemission control devices with regard to these elements is outlined in Section 3.5.5.

Table 16:Fractions of heavy metals emitted in gaseous form (fg) released by the combustionof coal /35/

Heavy metal fg [wt.-%]

Arsenic 0.5

Mercury 90

Selenium 15

4.9.1.2 Calculation of specified emission factors based on fly ash composition /cf. 39/If the concentration of heavy metals in raw gas fly ash is known, emission factors of heavymetals can be assessed by Equation (12). Gaseous emissions have to be taken into accountseparately as outlined in Section 4.9.1.1.

EF EF CR f HM pHM P FA raw, ,( )= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ −−10 13 η (12)

EFR HM P,specified emission factor of heavy metal in particulate matter (in mass pollutant/mass coal [g/Mg])

EFf fly ash emission factor of raw gas (in mass particulate matter/mass coal [kg/Mg])

CHMFA raw,heavy metal concentration in raw gas fly ash (in mass pollutant/mass particulate matter [g/Mg])

ηp efficiency of dust control equipment [ ]



Values of EFf can be calculated in a technology specific way using default parameters, as

given in Table 17 depending on the content of ash in coal (a) in [wt.-%].

Table 17:Fly ash emission factor for raw gas (EFf) as function of the ash content in coal (a)[wt.-%] /cf. 39/

Technology

EFf

(in mass particulate matter / mass coal)

[kg/Mg]

Cyclone 1.4⋅a

Stoker 5.9⋅a

Pulverised coal combustion 7.3⋅a

The emission factors calculated by taking into account the fuel or the fly ash compositionmainly depend on the estimation of the efficiency of dust control equipment.

4.9.1.3 Calculation of specified emission factors based on fly ash concentration in clean fluegas /cf. 36/If the concentration of heavy metals in fly ash in clean flue gas is known, emission factors ofheavy metals can be assessed by Equation (13). Gaseous emissions have to be taken intoaccount separately, as outlined in Section 4.9.1.1.

EF C C V 10R HM FG FG9

HM,P FA,clean= ⋅ ⋅ ⋅ − (13)

EFR HM P,specified emission factor of heavy metal in particulate matter (in mass

pollutant/mass coal [g/Mg])CHMFA clean,

concentration of heavy metal in fly ash in clean flue gas (in mass pollutant/mass fly

ash [g/Mg])CFG concentration of fly ash in clean flue gas (in mass fly ash/volume flue gas [mg/m3])

VFG specific flue gas volume (in volume flue gas/ mass coal [m3/Mg])

Fuel and technology specific heavy metal concentrations in fly ash in clean flue gas(CHMFA clean.

) are given in Table 18 /36/:



Table 18:Concentration of heavy metals in fly ash in clean flue gas /36/

CHMFA clean.DBB/hc [g/Mg] WBB/hc [g/Mg] DBB/hc [g/Mg]

Heavy metal range value range value range value

As 61 - 528 300 171 - 1,378 690 70 - 120 100

Cd 0.5 - 18 10 18 - 117 80 7 - 12 10

Cr 73 - 291 210 84 - 651 310 10 - 250 70

Cu 25 - 791 290 223 - 971 480 13 - 76 50

Ni 58 - 691 410 438 - 866 650 n. a. 90

Pb 31 - 2,063 560 474 - 5,249 2,210 10 - 202 90

Se1) 18 - 58 45 7 - 8 7 n. a. n. a.

Zn 61 - 2,405 970 855 - 7,071 3,350 50 - 765 2401) does not include gaseous Se

n. a.: not available

Default values of particulate matter concentrations downstream of FGD (CFG) are given inTable 19.

Table 19:Particulate matter concentrations downstream of FGD (CFG) released by thecombustion of coal based on /18/

Type of FGD CFG [mg/m3]

range value1)

WS 20 - 30 25

SDA 20 - 30 25

WL 5 - 10 8

WAP 5 - 10 8

AC < 40 20

DESONOX < 40 201) Recommended value, if no other information is available.

The concentration of fly ash in flue gas is often monitored continuously. In this case the totalannual fly ash emissions can be derived from measured data (see Section 5.2).



4.9.2 Combustion of other fuels

General emission factors for oil and gas combustion can be found in Table 31. Among theother fuels, only waste is relevant for heavy metal emissions. Emission factors for thecombustion of waste are currently not available (reported emission factors within theliterature mainly refer to the incineration of waste).

5 DETAILED METHODOLOGY

The detailed methodology refers to the handling of measured data in order to determineannual emissions or in order to verify emission factors (for comparison purposes). Annualemissions from major contributors should only be obtained by using continuously measureddata which are normally available if secondary abatement technologies are installed.Furthermore, the detailed methodology should be used whenever measured data are available;e.g. for medium and small sized combustion installations periodically measured data are oftenavailable.

Measurements are carried out downstream of the boiler or at the stack; measured valuesobtained by both variants are usable.

National monitoring programmes should include guidelines for quality assurance ofmeasurements (measuring places, methods, reporting procedures, etc.).

The pollutants normally measured at power plants are SO2, NOx, CO, and particulate matter.Gaseous emissions of SO2, NOx, and CO are treated in Section 5.1. Continuously measuredparticulate matter emission data can be used to estimate heavy metal emissions (seeSection 5.2).

5.1 Gaseous emissions

It is desirable to obtain annual emissions in [Mg]. The annual emission as a function of timeis normally given by the following Equation (14):

∫=T

dtteE )( (14)

E emission within the period T [Mg]

e (t) emission per unit of time in the periods of operation [Mg/h]

t time [h]

T annual time period (see also Figure 1)

Usually, the emission e(t) cannot be or is not directly measured. Therefore, for practicalreasons, the concentration of pollutants and the flue gas volume are used for thedetermination of e(t), as described by Equation (15):

e t V t C t( ) ( ) ( )= ⋅⋅

(15)

e (t) emission in the periods of operation [Mg/h]

V⋅

(t) flue gas volume flow rate [m3/h]



C (t) flue gas concentration of a pollutant [mg/m3]

Usually, emission fluctuations occur within a year (see Figure 1) as:

- periodical fluctuations (e.g. daily, weekly, seasonally), due to load managementdepending on the demand of e.g. district heat or electricity,

- operational fluctuations (e.g. start-ups/shut downs, raw material properties, workingconditions/reaction conditions).

V C⋅⋅

[ ]mgh

h

T

V⋅

flue gas volume flow rate [m3/h]

C flue gas concentration of a pollutant (abatement techniques installed are included) [mg/m3]

t time [h]

tbn beginning of operation (e.g. start-up of boiler) [h]

ten ending of operation (e.g. shut down of boiler) [h]

T annual time period

Figure 1: Periods of operation of a combustion installation

The following approaches can be used to determine annual emissions depending on the levelof detail of measured data available.

− First approach:

The flue gas volume and the concentration of a pollutant are measured continuously (e.g.in Finland). Then, the annual emission is given exactly by the following Equation (16):

∫ ⋅= −

T

dttCtVE )()(10 9 (16)


V⋅

(t) flue gas volume flow rate [m3/h]

C (t) flue gas concentration of a pollutant (abatement techniques installed are included) [mg/m3]

t time [h]


The precision of measurements of V t⋅( ) and C(t) depends on the performance of the analytical

methods (e.g. state-of-the-art) used. In particular, the regular calibration of measuringinstruments is very important. Analytical methods commonly used for NOx detect only NO



and those used for SOx detect only SO2. It is implicitly assumed that NO2 in the flue gas isnormally below 5 %, and that SO3 in the flue gas is negligible. Nevertheless, for somecombustion plants the amounts of NO2 and/or SO3 formed can be significant and have to bedetected by appropriate analytical methods. The measured values have to be specified withregard to dry/wet flue gas conditions and standard oxygen concentrations8.

For the annual time period T considered, a case distinction has to be made:

- calendar year T1 (e.g. including time out of operation),

- real operating time T2 of boiler/plant (e.g. start-ups are reported when „burner on/off“),

- official reporting time T3 determined by legislation (e.g. start-ups are reported, as soonas the oxygen content in the flue gas goes below 16 %),

where T3⊂ T2⊂ T1. If C(t) is only available for T3, adequate corrections have to beprovided.

− Second approach:

Due to the difficulty in measuring V(t) continuously in large diameter stacks, in most casesthe flue gas volume flow rate V(t) is not measured. Then the annual emission can bedetermined by Equation (17):

∫−=T

dttCVE )(10 9 & (17)


V& average flue gas volume flow rate [m3/h]

C(t) flue gas concentration of a pollutant (abatement techniques installed are included) [mg/m3]

t time [h]


The average flue gas volume flow rate V& (dry conditions) can be determined according to thefollowing Equations (18) and (19):

fuelFG mVV && ⋅= (18)


VFG dry flue gas volume per mass fuel [m3/kg]

fuelm& fuel consumption rate [kg/h]

V 1.852 C 0.682 C 0.800 C VFGmkg c

ms

mkg N N

3 3 3

air≈ ⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ +kg (19)

VFG dry flue gas volume per mass fuel [m3/kg]

Cc concentration of carbon in fuel [kg/kg]

Cs concentration of sulphur in fuel [kg/kg]

8 In some countries the measured values obtained are automatically converted into values under standard

oxygen concentrations (e.g. in Germany).



CN concentration of nitrogen in fuel [kg/kg]

VNairspecific volume of air nitrogen (in volume/mass fuel [m3/kg])

This calculation of V according to Equation (19) can be performed by the computerprogramme (see Annex 6) by using default values for CC, CS, CN and VNair

.

− Third approach:

In some countries the term ∫T

dttC )( is available as an annual density function P(C)

(histogram). In this case Equation (17) can be simplified to:

910−⋅⋅⋅= optCVE & (20)

where dCCCPC ⋅⋅= ∫∞

0

)( (21)



C expected value (mean value) of the flue gas concentration for each pollutant (abatement techniquesinstalled are included) [mg/m3]

top annual operating time [h]

P(C) density function [ ]

C flue gas concentration per pollutant as given in the histogram [mg/m3]

The variable top has to be introduced consistently with V& and C according to periods T1, T2

or T3 mentioned above. If e.g. start-ups are not included, they should be taken into account asgiven in Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.4.

− Fourth approach:If neither T2 nor T3 are available, the annual full load operating hours can also be used.Then Equation (20) becomes:

910−⋅⋅⋅= loadfullopnormed tCVE & (22)


normedV& average flue gas volume flow rate related to full load operation [m3/h]

C mean value of the flue gas concentration for each pollutant (abatement techniques installed areincluded) [mg/m3]

topfull load annual operating time expressed as full load operating hours [h]

From here, emission factors, based on measured values, can be derived e.g. for verificationpurposes:

EFE

A= ⋅106 (23)

EF emission factor [g/GJ]




A activity rate within the time period considered [GJ]

5.2 Heavy metal emissions

Continuously measured values for the total heavy metal emissions (particle-bound andgaseous) are not available for the combustion of fossil fuels. National legislation can requireperiodical measurements, e.g. weekly measurements of heavy metal emissions [mg/m3] in thecase of waste incineration/combustion.

The emissions of particle-bound heavy metals depend on the emission of particulate matterwhich is normally periodically or continuously monitored. Therefore, the particle-boundheavy metal emissions can be derived from the element content in particulate matter. Theheavy metal emission factor can be back-calculated as follows:

A

CmEF cleanFAHMFA .⋅=

&(24)

EF emission factor [g/GJ]

FAm& mass of fly ash within the period considered [Mg]

CHMFA clean.average concentration of heavy metal in fly ash (in mass pollutant/mass fly ash [g/Mg])


Measured data should also be used to replace the default values of Equation (13) for CHMFA clean.

and CFG.

6 RELEVANT ACTIVITY STATISTICS

In general, the published statistics do not include point sources individually. Information onthis level should be obtained directly from each plant operator.

On a national level, statistics can be used for the determination of fuel consumption, installedcapacity and/or types of boilers mainly used. The following statistical publications can berecommended:

− Office for Official Publication of the European Communities (ed.): Annual Statistics 1990;Luxembourg 1992

− Commission of the European Communities (ed.): Energy in Europe - Annual EnergyReview; Brussels 1991

− Statistical Office of the European Communities (EUROSTAT) (ed.): CRONOS Databank,1993

− OECD (ed.): Environmental Data, Données OCDE sur l’environnement; compendium1993

− Commission of the European Communities (ed.): Energy in Europe; 1993 - Annual EnergyReview; Special Issue; Brussels 1994



− EUROSTAT (ed.): Panorama of EU Industry’94; Office for official publications of theEuropean Communities; Luxembourg 1994

7 POINT SOURCE CRITERIA

Point source criteria for a combustion plant according to CORINAIR are given in chapterAINT and in /41/.

8 EMISSION FACTORS, QUALITY CODES AND REFERENCES

Tables 23 - 31 list emission factors for all pollutants considered, except for SO2. For SO2

emission factors have to be calculated individually (see Equation (5)). Sulphur contents ofdifferent fuels are given. The emission factors have been derived from the literature, from thecalculations presented here (see also Section 4) and from recommendations from expert panelmembers. All emission factor tables have been designed in a homogenous structure: Table 20contains the allocation of SNAP activities used related to combustion installations, wherethree classes are distinguished according to the thermal capacity installed. Table 21 includesthe main types of fuel used within the CORINAIR90 inventory. Table 22 provides a split ofcombustion techniques (types of boilers, etc.); this standard table has been used for allpollutants. The sequence of the emission factor tables is:

Table 20: SNAP code and SNAP activity related to the thermal capacities installed incombustion plants

Table 21: Selection of relevant fuels from NAPFUE and lower heating values for boilers,gas turbines and stationary engines

Table 22: Standard table for emission factors for the relevant pollutants

Table 23: S-contents of selected fuels

Table 24: NOx emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Table 25: NOx emission factors [g/GJ] for coal combustion according to the model

description (see Annexes 4 and 5)

Table 26: NMVOC emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants (coal combustion)

Table 27: CH4 emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Table 28: CO emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Table 29: CO2 emission factors [kg/GJ] for combustion plants

Table 30: N2O emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Table 31: Heavy metal emission factors [g/Mg] for combustion plants

References of the emission factors listed are given in footnotes of the following tables.Quality codes are not available in the literature.



Table 20: SNAP code and SNAP activity related to the thermal capacities installed in combustion plants

Thermal capacity [MW] SNAP code SNAP activity

>= 300 010101 Public power and co-generation combustion plants010201 District heating combustion plants010301 Petroleum and/or gas refining plants010401 Solid fuel transformation plants010501 Coal mining, oil, gas extraction/distribution plants020101 Commercial and institutional plants030101 Industrial combustion plants

>=50 up to < 300 010102 Public power and co-generation combustion plants010202 District heating combustion plants020102 Commercial and institutional plants020201 Residential combustion plants020301 Plants in agriculture, forestry and fishing030102 Industrial combustion plants

< 50 010103 Public power and co-generation combustion plants010203 District heating combustion plants020103 Commercial and institutional plants020202 Residential combustion plants020302 Plants in agriculture, forestry and fishing030103 Industrial combustion plants



Table 21: Selection of relevant fuels from NAPFUE and lower heating values for boilers, gas turbines and stationary engines

Type of fuel according to NAPFUE NAPFUE Hu

code [MJ/kg]²)s coal hc coking 1) GHV11) > 23,865 kJ/kg 101 29.34)

s coal hc steam 1) GHV11) > 23,865 kJ/kg 102 29.34)

s coal hc sub-bituminous 17,435 kJ/kg < GHV11) < 23,865 kJ/kg 103 20.6s coal hc/bc patent fuels from hard/sub-bituminous coal 104s coal bc brown coal/lignite GHV11) < 17,435 kJ/kg 105 12.1s coal bc briquettes 106 19.54); 18.65)

s coke hc coke oven 107 26.310)

s coke bc coke oven 108 29.97)

s coke petroleum 110 3010)

s biomass wood 111 12.44), 1610)

s biomass charcoal 112s biomass peat 113 9.510)

s waste municipal 114 7.54)

s waste industrial 115 8.48)

s waste wood except wastes similar to wood 116s waste agricultural corncobs, straw etc. 117l oil residual 203 41.04)

l oil gas 204 42.74), 42.510)

l oil diesel for road transport 205l kerosene 206l gasoline motor 208 43.54)

l naphtha 210l black liquor 215g gas natural except liquified natural gas 301 heavy 39.7 MJ/m3 ³), light 32.5 MJ/m3 ³)

g gas liquified petroleum gas 303 45.410)

g gas coke oven 304 19.810)

g gas blast furnace 305 3.010)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306g gas waste 307g gas refinery not condensable 308 48.46), 87 MJ/m3 10)

g gas biogas 309 34.79)

g gas from gas works 311



1) A principal differentiation between coking coal and steam coal is given in section 3.2. Further differentiation between coking coal and steam coal can be made by using the content of volatiles: coking coal contains 20 - 30 wt.-% volatiles (maf), steam coal contains 9.5 - 20 wt.-% volatiles (maf) (based on official UK subdivision). This is necessary if no information concerning the mean random reflectance of vitrinite (see Section 3.2) is available.2) Hu = lower heating value; lower heating values for coals from different countries are given in Annexes 7 and 8 and

for solid, liquid and gaseous fuels in (/88/, Table 1-2).3) given under standard conditions4) Kolar 1990 /17/5) /98/6) MWV 1992 /97/7) Boelitz 1993 /78/8) Schenkel 1990 /105/9) Steinmüller 1984 /107/10) NL-handbook 1988 /99/11) GHV = Gross heating value



Table 22: Standard table of emission factors for the relevant pollutants

Thermal boiler capacity [MW]4) no specifi->= 300 >= 50 and < 300 < 50 cation

Type of boiler Type of boiler Type of boiler GT10) Stat. E.11) CORINAIR9012)

DBB5) WBB6) FBC7) DBB WBB FBC7) GF8) DBB WBB FBC7) GF

Type of fuel1) NAPFUE Hu 2) Primary Primary CFBC CFBC PFBC ST1 ST2 AFBC CFBC PFBC ST1 ST2 SC CC CI SI

code1) [MJ/kg] P13) measures9) measures9)

s coal hcs coal hcs coal hcs coal bc ... ... ...s cokes biomasss wastel oilg gas

1) the type of fuel is based on the NAPFUE code, see table 212) Hu = lower heating value, when different from table 213) relevant parameter of fuel composition for SO2: P1 = sulphur content of fuel;4) the corresponding SNAP-codes are listed in table 205) DBB - Dry bottom boiler6) WBB - Wet bottom boiler7) FBC - Fluidised bed combustion; CFBC = Circulating FBC; PFBC = Pressurised FBC (Dense FBC); AFBC = Atmospheric FBC8) GF - Grate firing; ST1 and ST2 are different types of stoker (e.g. travelling stoker, spreader stoker) 9) Primary measures are described by reduction efficiency 10) GT = Gas turbine; SC = Simple cycle; CC = Combined cycle11) Stat. E. = Stationary engine; CI = Compression ignition; SI = Spark ignition12) CORINAIR90 data on combustion plants as point sources



Table 23: S-contents of selected fuels 1)

Type of fuel NAPFUE Sulphur content of fuelcode value 2) range unit

s coal 3) hc coking 101 0.4 - 6.2 wt.-% (maf)s coal 3) hc steam 102 0.4 - 6.2 wt.-% (maf)s coal 3) hc sub-bituminous 103 0.4 - 6.2 wt.-% (maf)s coal 3) bc brown coal/lignite 105 0.4 - 6.2 wt.-% (maf)

s coal bc briquettes 106 0.25 - 0.4513) wt.-% (maf)s coke hc coke oven 107 < 1 5) wt.-% (maf)s coke bc coke oven 108 0.5 - 1 5) 6) wt.-% (maf)s coke petroleum 110s biomass wood 111 < 0.03 5) wt.-% (maf)s biomass charcoal 112 < 0.03 5) wt.-% (maf)s biomass peat 113s waste municipal 114s waste industrial 115s waste wood 116s waste agricultural 117l oil residual 203 0.3 8) - 3.5 9) wt.-%l oil gas 204 0.3 11) 0.08 - 1.0 wt.-%l oil diesel 205 0.3 11) wt.-%l kerosene 206l gasoline motor 208 < 0.0512) wt.-%l naphtha 210l black liquor 215

g gas4) natural 301 (0.0075) 10) g . m-3

g gas liquified petroleum gas 303 -

g gas coke oven 304 8 g . m-3

g gas blast furnace 305 45 . 10-3 10) g . m-3

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306g gas waste 307

g gas refinery 308 <= 8 10) g . m-3

g gas biogas 309g gas from gas works 311



1) for emission factor calculation see Section 4.1, and Annexes 2 and 32) recommended value3) for complete coal composition see Annexes 7 and 84) only trace amounts5) Marutzky 1989 /94/6) Boelitz 1993 /78/8) Mr. Hietamäki (Finland): Personal communication 9) Referring to NL-handbook 1988 /99/ the range is 2.0 - 3.510) NL-handbook 1988 /99/11) 87/219 CEE 1987 /113/12) αs ~ 013) Davids 1986 /46/



Table 24: NOx emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Thermal boiler capacity [MW]

>= 30032) >= 50 and < 30032)

Type of fuel NAPFUE Type of boiler43) Type of boilercode DBB/boiler27) WBB FBC DBB/boiler27) WBB

CFBCs coal hc coking 101 see table 25 see table 25 701) see table 25 see table 25s coal hc steam 102 see table 25 see table 25 701) see table 25 see table 25s coal hc sub-bitumious 103 see table 25 see table 25 701) see table 25 see table 25s coal bc brown coal/lignite 105 see table 25 701) see table 25s coal bc briquettes 106s coke hc coke oven 107s coke bc coke oven 108s coke petroleum 110 3001)

s biomass wood 111 2001),15)

s biomass charcoal 112s biomass peat 113 3001),28) 3001)

s waste municipal 114s waste industrial 115s waste wood 116s waste agricultural 117l oil residual 203 2101),29), 2601),28), 155 - 29619),20) 1501),29), 1701),29), 1901),30), 2101),30)

l oil gas 204 64 - 6821) 1001)

l oil diesel 205l kerosene 206l gasoline motor 208l naphtha 210l black liquor 215g gas natural 301 1701), 48 - 33322) 23) 1251),25), 1501),26), 48 - 33322),23),24)

g gas liquified petroleum gas 303 88 - 33323),24) 88 - 33323),24)

g gas coke oven 304 1501), 88 - 33323) 24) 1101),25), 1301),26), 88 - 33323),24)

g gas blast furnace 305 951), 88 - 33323) 24) 651)25), 801),26), 88 - 33323),24)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306 88 - 33323),24) 88 - 33323),24)

g gas waste 307 88 - 33323),24) 88 - 33323),24)

g gas refinery 308 88 - 33323),24) 1401), 88 - 33323),24)

g gas biogas 309 88 - 33323),24) 88 - 33323),24)


to be continued



Table 24: continued

Thermal boiler capacity [MW] no speci-

> 50 and < 300 32) < 5032) ficationType of boiler Type of boiler Gas turbine Stationary engine CORINAIR 9044)

FBC GF DBB/boiler27) WBB FBC GFPFBC CFBC PFBC CFBC AFBC SC CC CI SI1501) 701) 1501) 1801),31), 2301),29) 701) 1501) 54544)

1501) 701) 1501) 1801),31), 2301),29) 701) 1501) 36.5 - 76144)

1501) 701) 1501) 1801),31), 2301),29) 701) 1501) 20.5 - 1,68344)

1501) 701) 1501) 1801),31), 2301),29) 701) 1501) 180 - 38044)

33.3 - 17544)

3001) 3001) 3001)

2001), 33 - 11515) 2001), 33 - 11515) 2001),15) 50 - 20044)

1601) 1001) 2301) 2801) 1601) 1001) 150 - 24044)

90 - 46316),17) 90 - 46316),17) 22044)

139 - 14018) 139 - 14018)

80 - 20044)

886) 16044)

1401),29), 1801),30) 25045) 1,090-1,20045) 24 - 37044)

801), 1001) 120 1),35), 3501),33), 3801),34), 7801),36) 100 - 1,20045) 50 - 26944)

100 - 70045), 30046) 6001),37),42), 1,2001),38) 1,0001),40),42), 1,8001),39),42)

18044)

20 - 44044)

1001), 48 - 33322),23),24) 150 - 36045) 6001),37),42), 1,2001),38),42) 1,0001),40),42), 1,8001),39),42) 22 - 35044)

1884),41) 1874),41)

88 - 33323),24) 35 - 10044)

901),23),24) 70 - 57144)

88 - 33323),24) 6.7 - 33044)

88 - 33323),24)

88 - 33323),24) 35 - 32744)

1401),23),24) 150-15145) 35 - 14044)

88 - 33323),24) 6044)



1) CORINAIR 1992 /80/, without primary measures 15) utility boiler: 1126), commercial boiler: 336), industrial boiler: 1156)

2) Ratajczak 1987 /103/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 16) utility boiler (GF): 1406), commercial boiler: 4636), commercial open burning: 36) kg/Mg waste 3) Lim 1982 /91/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 17) GF: 90 - 1808)

4) Mobley 1985 /96/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 18) industrial combustion (mass burn.): 1406), industrial combustion (small burner): 1396)

5) LIS 1977 /92/ 19) DBB (power plants): 24011), 24510), 2969), 27010)

6) Radian 1990 /102/, IPCC 1994 /88/, without primary measues 20) utility boiler: 2016), commercial boiler: 1556), industrial boiler: 1616)

7) UBA 1985 /111/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 21) utility boiler: 686), commercial boiler: 646)

8) Kolar 1990 /17/ 22) utility boiler: 2676), commercial boiler: 486), industrial boiler: 676)

9) Bartok 1970 /75/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 23) power plant: 1609), 17010), 18510), 19011), 21510), 33313)

10) Kremer 1979 /90/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 24) industry: 889), 10011)

11) UBA 1981 /110/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 25) 50 - 100 MW thermal12) LIS 1987 /93/ 26) 100 - 300 MW thermal13) Davids 1984 /81/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 27) DBB for coal combustion; boiler for other fuel combustion14) Ministry 1980 /95/, Kolar 1990 /17/ 28) wall firing

29) tangential firing30) wall/bottom firing31) wall/tangential firing32) The emission factors [g/GJ] are given at full load operating modus.33) no specification34) with diffusion burner35) modern with pre-mixer36) derived from aero engines37) prechamber injection38) direct injection39) 4 stroke engines40) 2 stroke engines41) 801),35), 2501),33), 160 - 4801),34), 6501),36)

42) 10001),33)

43) The formation of thermal-NO is much more influenced by the combustion temperature than by the burner arrangement within the boiler /64/. Therefore, no emission factors are given for different burner arrangements (e.g. tangential firing).44) CORINAIR90 data of combustion plants as point sources with thermal capacity of > 300, 50 - 300, <50 MW45) CORINAIR90 data of combustion plants as point sources46) AP42 /115/



Table 25: NOx emission factors [g/GJ] for coal combustion according to the model (see Annexes 4 and 5)

Thermal boiler capacity [MW]>= 50 ¹)

Type of fuel coal mining country NAPFUE Hu [MJ/kg] Type of boilercode (maf) DBB WBB

PM0²) PM1 PM2 PM3 PM4 PM0 PM1 PM2 PM3 PM4η= 0 η= 0.20 η=0.45 η=0.45 η=0.60 η= 0 η= 0.20 η=0.45 η=0.40 η=0.60

s coal hc Australia (101) 34 568 454 312 312 227 703 562 387 422 281

Canada (101) 33 500 405 278 278 202 627 501 345 376 251

China (101) 32 413 331 227 227 165 512 409 281 307 205

Columbia (101) 32 535 428 394 394 214 662 529 364 397 265

Czech Republic (101) 34 483 387 266 266 193 598 479 329 359 239

France 101 35 374 299 205 205 149 463 370 254 278 185

Germany RAG 102 35 384 307 211 211 154 476 381 262 285 190

Germany others 101 30 495 396 272 272 198 613 490 337 368 245

CIS (101) 32 308 247 169 169 123 382 305 210 229 153

Hungary 101 34 401 320 220 220 160 496 397 273 298 198

India 103 30 551 441 303 303 220 682 545 375 409 273

South Africa (101) 32 569 456 313 313 228 705 504 388 423 282

USA (101) 34 563 450 310 310 225 697 558 383 418 279

Venezuela (101) 34 588 471 324 324 235 728 583 401 437 291η= 0 η= 0.20 η=0.45 η=0.40 η=0.60

s coal bc Czech Republic 105 28 506 405 278 304 202

Germany

- Rheinisch Coal 105 27 325 260 179 195 130

- Middle Germany 105 25 504 403 277 302 202

- East Germany 105 26 539 431 296 323 215

Hungary-1 105 36 379 303 208 227 151

Hungary-2 103 28 379 304 209 228 152

Poland 105 25 531 425 292 319 213

Portugal 105 25 461 369 254 277 185

Turkey-2 103 27 725 580 399 435 2901) The emission factors [g/GJ] are given at full load operating modus.2) PM0 ... PM4 = most used combinations of primary

measures; η = reduction efficiencies [ ] PM0 - no primary measures

PM1 - one primary measure: LNB

PM2 - two primary measures: LNB/SAS

PM3 - two primary measures: LNB/OFA

PM4 - three primary measures: LNB/SAS/OFA



Table 26: NMVOC emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Thermal boiler capacity [MW] no speci-Type of fuel NAPFUE >= 50 < 50 fication

code boiler GF boiler Gas turbine Stationary engine CORINAIR906)

s coal hc coking 101 35), 302) 502) 6001) 36)

s coal hc steam 102 35), 302) 502) 6001) 1 - 156)

s coal hc sub-bituminous 103 35), 302) 502) 6001) 1.5 - 156)

s coal bc brown coal/lignite 105 302),3) 502) 1.5 - 156)

s coal bc briquettes 106 1501)

s coke hc coke oven 107 121) 5 - 156)

s coke bc coke oven 108s coke petroleum 110 1.56)

s biomass wood 111 802) 1005), 1501), 4004) 10 - 486)

s biomass charcoal 112s biomass peat 113 302),3) 302) 3 - 486)

s waste municipal 114 106)

s waste industrial 115s waste wood 116 40 - 486)

s waste agricultural 117 506)

l oil residual 203 102),3) 37) 507) 1.5 - 47.66)

l oil gas 204 52) 151) 52), 1.5 - 27) 1.5 - 1007), 1002) 1.5 - 9.36)

l oil diesel 205l kerosene 206 36)

l gasoline motor 208l naphtha 210 36)

l black liquor 215 36)

g gas natural 301 52) 52), 2.5 - 47) 2002) 2 - 46)

g gas liquified petroleum gas 303 2 - 2.66)

g gas coke oven 304 2.5 - 1676)

g gas blast furnace 305 1 - 2.56)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306g gas waste 307 2.56)

g gas refinery 308 252) 2.57) 2.1 - 106)

g gas biogas 309 2.56)

g gas from gas works 3111) LIS 1977 /92/ 2) CORINAIR 1992 /80/ 3) DBB only 4) small consumers cf. /24/ 5) power plants cf. /24/6) CORINAIR90 data of combustion plants as point sources with a thermal capacity of > 300, 50 - 300, < 50 MW 7) CORINAIR90 data, point sources



Table 27: CH4 emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Type of combustion stat. E. no speci-Utility combustion Commercial comb. Industrial combustion fication

Tpe of fuel NAPFUE DBB/WBB GF boiler GF boiler GF GTcode FBC/ stoker stoker SC CC CORINAIR905)

boiler3) spreader travell. spreader travell.s coal hc coking 101 0.61) 0.71) 101) 2.41) 0.3 - 155)

s coal hc steam 102 0.61) 0.71) 101) 2.41) 1.5 - 155)

s coal hc sub-bituminous 103 0.61) 0.71) 101) 2.41) 0.3 - 155)

s coal bc brown coal/lignite 105 0.61) 0.71) 101) 2.41)

s coal bc briquettes 106s coke hc coke oven 107 0.2 - 155)

s coke bc coke oven 108s coke petroleum 110 1.55)

s biomass wood 111 181) 151) 151) 1 - 405)

s biomass charcoal 112s biomass peat 113 1 - 395)

s waste municipal 114 6.51),4) 15)

s waste industrial 115 105)

s waste wood 116 4 - 405)

s waste agricultural 117 91),4) 325)

l oil residual 203 0.71) 1.61) 2.91) 35) 36) 0.1 - 105)

l oil gas 204 0.031) 0.61) 1 - 85) 1.56) 0.1 - 85)



l black liquor 215 1 - 17.75)

g gas natural 301 0.11) 1.21) 2) 1.41) 2.5 - 46) 0.3 - 45)

5.91) 6.11)


g gas coke oven 304 0.3 - 45)

g gas blast furnace 305 0.3 - 2.55)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306g gas waste 307 2.55)

g gas refinery 308 0.1 - 2.55)

g gas biogas 309 2.56) 0.5 - 2.55)

g gas from gas works 3111) Radian 1990 /102/, IPCC 1994 /88/ 2) for all types of gas 3) DBB/WBB/FBC for coal combustion; boiler for fuel combustion 4) open burning5) CORINAIR90 data of combustion plants as point sources with thermal capacity of >300, 50 - 300 and <50 MW6) CORINAIR90 data, point sources



Table 28: CO emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Type of combustion no speci-Utility combustion Commercial comb. Industrial combustion fication

Type of fuel NAPFUE DBB/WBB/ GF boiler GF DBB/WBB/ GF GT stat. E. CORINAIR909)

code boilers1) stoker boiler1) stokerspreader travell. spreader travelling

s coal hc coking 101 143) 1213) 1953) 9.72), 134) 812), 1154) 97.22) 159)

s coal hc steam 102 143) 1213) 1953) 9.72), 134) 1154) 9.72) 10 - 175.29)

s coal hc sub-bituminous 103 143) 1213) 1953) 9.72), 134) 812), 1154) 97.22) 12 - 246.99)

s coal bc brown coal/lignite 105 143) 1213) 1953) 162), 134) 1332), 1154) 1602) 9.6 - 64.49)

s coal bc briquettes 106s coke hc coke oven 107 102 - 1219)

s coke bc coke oven 108s coke petroleum 110 159)

s biomass wood 111 1,4733) 1993) 1,5043) 30 - 3009)


s waste municipal 114 983),6) 193) 193)7), 963)7), 42 kg/Mg3),8) 309)

s waste industrial 115s waste wood 116 12 - 3009)

s waste agricultural 117 58 kg/Mg3),8) 209)

l oil residual 203 153) 173) 153) 10 - 1510) 10010) 3 - 32.69)

l oil gas 204 153) 163) 123) 10 - 2010) 12 - 1,13010) 10 - 46.49)

20.611)



l black liquor 215 11.1 - 3149)

g gas natural 301 193) 9.63) 173), 135) 10 - 2010), 323) 0.05 - 609)

g gas liquified petroleum gas 303 10 - 139)

g gas coke oven 304 0.03 - 1309)

g gas blast furnace 305 0.3 - 64.49)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306g gas waste 307 0.1 - 25.59)

g gas refinery 308 1010) 2 - 159)

g gas biogas 309 139)




1) DBB/WBB for coal combustion; boiler for other fuel combustion2) EPA 1987 /85/, CORINAIR 1992 /80/3) Radian 1990 /102/, IPCC 1994 /88/, without primary measure4) OECD 1989 /100/, CORINAIR 1992 /80/5) CORINAIR 1992 /80/, part 86) grate firing without specification7) small combustion 19 g/GJ, mass burning 96 g/GJ8) open burning9) CORINAIR90 data of combustion plants as point sources with a thermal capacity of > 300, 50 - 300, < 50 MW10) CORINAIR90 data, point sources11) AP42 /115/



Table 29: CO2 emission factors [kg/GJ] for combustion plants

NAPFUE Emission factorsType of fuel code value range remarks

s coal hc coking 101 92 - 93 5), 89.6 - 942)

s coal hc steam 102 93.7 3), 92 5) 92 - 93 5), 10 - 982)

s coal hc sub-bituminous 103 94.7 3) 91 - 115.22)

s coal bc brown coal/lignite 105 100.2 3) 94 - 107.92), 110 - 1135)

s coal bc briquettes 106 98 97 - 995)

s coke hc coke oven 107 95.9 4), 108 1) 100 - 1055), 105 - 1082)

s coke bc coke oven 108 96 - 1115)

s coke petroleum 110 1015), 121.2 4), 100.82)

s biomass wood 111 100 ¹), 124.9 4) 92 - 1002)

s biomass charcoal 112s biomass peat 113 985) 102 - 1152)

s waste municipal 114 15 5), 282) 109 - 1411)

s waste industrial 115 13.5 - 20 5)

s waste wood 116 83 - 1002)

s waste agricultural 117l oil residual 203 75.8 4), 76.6 3), 78 5) 15 - 932) petroleum oil 72.6 3)

l oil gas 204 72.7 4), 74 5), 75 ¹) 73 - 74 5), 57 - 752)

l oil diesel 205 72.7 4), 73 5)

l kerosene 206 73.32) 72 - 745)

l gasoline motor 208 70.8 3), 71.7 4), 72.2 1) 72 - 745)

l naphtha 210 72.6 3), 742)

l black liquor 215 100 - 1102)

g gas natural 301 55.5 3), 60.8 4) 55 - 56 5), 44 - 572)

g gas liquified petroleum gas 303 64 - 655), 57 - 652)

g gas coke oven 304 44 5) 44 - 495), 41.6 - 902)

g gas blast furnace 305 105 5) 100 - 1055), 92 - 2802)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace gas 306g gas waste 307 44.4 - 572)

g gas refinery 308 60 5)

g gas biogas 309 752) 10.5 - 73.32)

g gas from gas works 311 522)



1) Schenkel 1990 /105/2) CORINAIR90 data on combustion plants as point sources with thermal capacity of > 300, 50 - 300, < 50 MW3) IPCC 1993 /87/4) Kamm 1993 /89/5) BMU 1994 /77/



Table 30: N2O emission factors [g/GJ] for combustion plants

Type of boiler no speci-Type of fuel NAPFUE DBB WBB FBC GF GT stat. E. fication

code value remarks value remarks value remarks value remarks CORINAIR904)

s coal hc coking 101 0.8 1) utility, no PM3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 144)

s coal hc steam 102 0.8 1) utility, no PM3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 2.5 - 1004)

s coal hc sub-bituminous 103 0.8 1) utility, no PM3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 2.5 - 304)

s coal bc brown coal/lignite 105 0.8 1) utility, no PM3) 0.8 1) utility, no PM 3) 1.4 - 304)

s coal bc briquettes 106s coke hc coke oven 107 1.4 - 254)

s coke bc coke oven 108s coke petroleum 110 144)

s biomass wood 111 4.3 1) commercial, no PM3) 4.3 1) commercial, no PM3) 4.3 1) commercial, no PM3) 1.4 - 754)


s waste municipal 114 14 - 165 2) g/t waste 11 - 270 2) g/t waste 44)

s waste industrial 115 1.44)

s waste wood 116 2 - 64)

s waste agricultural 117 54)

l oil residual 203 46.5 1) commercial, no PM3) 2.5 - 145) 2.55) 1.4 - 14.84)

l oil gas 204 15.7 1) commercial, no PM3) 2 - 35) 2.55) 0.6 - 144)



l black liquor 215 1 - 21.44)

g gas natural 301 2.4 1) commercial, no PM3) 1 - 35) 0.1 - 34)


g gas coke oven 304 1.1 - 34)

g gas blast furnace 305 1.1 - 34)

g gas coke oven and blast furnace 306g gas waste 307 1.1 - 2.54)

g gas refinery 308 2.55) 2.5 - 144)

g gas biogas 309 1.4 - 2.54)

g gas from gas works 3111) Radian 1990 /102/, IPCC 1994 /88/ 2) DeSoete 1993 /83/, IPCC 1994 /88/ 3) PM: Primary measure 5) CORINAIR90 data, point sources4) CORINAIR90 data on combustion plants as point sources with thermal capacity of > 300, 50 - 300, < 50 MW



Table 31: Heavy metal emission factors (g/Mg fuel) for combustion plants

Thermal boiler capacity [MW]>= 300 >= 50 and < 300 < 50

Type of boiler Type of boilerType of fuel NAPFUE Heavy metal DBB WBB DBB WBB FBC GF GF

code element Dust control 1) Dust control Dust control 1) Dust controland FGD 2) and FGD 2)

s coal hc 101/102 Mercury 0.05 - 0.2 0.02 - 0.08 0.05 - 0.2 0.02 - 0.08

Cadmium 0.003 - 0.01 0.0001 - 0.004 0.01 - 0.07 0.004 - 0.03

Lead 0.02 - 1.1 0.007 - 0.5 0.3 - 3 0.1 - 1.2

Copper 0.01 - 0.4 0.006 - 0.2 0.05 - 0.4 0.05 - 0.2

Zinc 0.03 - 1.3 0.01 - 0.5 0.5 - 4 0.2 - 1.6

Arsenic 0.03 - 0.3 0.01 - 0.1 0.1 - 0.8 0.04 - 0.3

Chromium 0.04 - 0.2 0.02 - 0.06 0.05 - 0.4 0.02 - 0.2

Selen 0.01 - 0.03 0.004 - 0.01 - -

Nickel 0.03 - 0.4 0.01 - 0.5 0.2 - 0.5 0.1 - 0.2

s coal bc 105 Mercury 0.05 - 0.2 0.02 - 0.08

Cadmium 0.002 - 0.004 0.0008 - 0.001

Lead 0.003 - 0.06 0.001 - 0.02

Copper 0.004 - 0.02 0.002 - 0.01

Zinc 0.01 - 0.2 0.006 - 0.1

Arsenic 0.03 - 0.04 0.008 - 0.01

Chromium 0.003 - 0.07 0.001 - 0.03

Selen - -

Nickel 0.02 - 0.04 0.01

l oil, heavy fuel 203 Mercury 1.04)

Cadmium 1.04)

Lead 1.34)

Copper 1.04)

Zinc 1.04)

Arsenic 0.54)

Chromium 2.54)

Selen

Vanadium 4.45)

Nickel 354)

g gas, natural 301 Mercury 0.05 - 0.15 g/TJ3)

1) clean gas particle concentration 50 mg/m3 3) 2 mg/m3 gas UBA 1980 /63/; 5 mg/m3 PARCOM 1992 /101/ 5) Jockel 1991 /36/2) FGD = Flue gas desulphurisation, clean gas particle concentration 20 mg/m3 4) general emission factor according to Stobbelaar 1992 /37/



9 SPECIFIC PROFILES

9.1 SOx emissions

Sulphur dioxide SO2 and sulphur trioxide SO3 are formed in the flame. Emissions of SO2 andSO3 are often considered together as SOx. Due to the equilibrium conditions at furnacetemperature, sulphur trioxide SO3 normally decomposes to sulphur dioxide SO2. Then theamount of SO2 in the flue gas is approximately 99 %. Therefore, SOx is given in this chapteras SO2.

9.2 NOx emissions

The most important oxides of nitrogen formed with respect to pollution are nitric oxide (NO)and nitrogen dioxide (NO2), jointly referred to as NOx. The main compound is NO, whichcontributes over 90 % to the total NOx. Other oxides of nitrogen, such as dinitrogen-trioxide(N2O3), dinitrogen-tetroxide (N2O4), and dinitrogen-pentoxide (N2O5), are formed innegligible amounts. Nitrous oxide (N2O) is considered separrately.

9.3 NMVOC emissions

Due to the minor relevance of NMVOC emissions for power plants no split of species isgiven.

9.4 Heavy metal emissions

The heavy metals, which are of most environmental concern, are: arsenic (As), cadmium(Cd), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), mercury (Hg), nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), selenium (Se) andzinc (Zn). This selection has been laid down by the UN-ECE Task Force on Heavy Metals,the PARCOM/ATMOS programme (cf. /35/) and the HELCOM programme. In the case ofheavy oil combustion, vanadium emissions (V) are also of importance. In fly ash particlesmost of these elements occur as oxides or chlorides. The contribution of various forms ofmercury to the emissions from combustion source categories in Europe is given in thefollowing Figure 2:



Emission Category/

Hg-species1) 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100%

Coal Combustion

Hg° −−−̂ −−−

HgII −−−̂ −−−

HgP −−−̂ −−−

Waste Incineration

Hg° −−−̂ −−−

HgII −−−̂ −−−

HgP −−−̂ −−−

1)Hg° elemental form

HgII oxidised form

HgP particle-bound

Figure 2: Contribution of various forms of mercury to the emissions from combustionsource categories in Europe in 1987 (in % of total) /29/

10 UNCERTAINTY ESTIMATES

Uncertainties of emission data result from the use of inappropriate or inaccurate emissionfactors, and from missing or inappropriate statistical information concerning activity data.Uncertainty estimates discussed here are related to the use of emission factors with differentbackground information. At this stage a quantification of the uncertainty related to the use ofemission factors is not feasible, due to the limited availability of data. However, the precisionof emission estimates can be improved by applying individually determined emission factors.

The aim of the following procedure is to show the Guidebook-user how a lack of informationconcerning the fuel and technical characteristics of a combustion facility gives rise to a highuncertainty in the allocation of the appropriate emission factor. The whole span of possibleemission factors is defined by the specification of the type of fuel used, the type of boiler, andthe type of primary and secondary measures. The more information about these topics can begathered, the smaller the span of possible emission factors becomes.

The following diagram (Figure 3) gives as an example the range of NOx emission factors[g/GJ] for pulverised coal combustion depending on the level of specification.



0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

nosp

ecif

icat

ion

soli

d

soli

d-hc

soli

d-hc

-D

BB

-no

PM

soli

d-hc

-D

BB

-PM

1

soli

d-hc

-D

BB

-PM

2

soli

d-hc

-D

BB

-PM

3

Specification

EF

[g/

GJ]

EF-min

EF-max

Figure 3: Ranges of NOx emission factors for the combustion of pulverised coal

The level of specification is defined as follows:

- „no information“ - the whole range of combustion sources is taken intoaccount,

- „solid“ - only solid fuels are taken into account,

- „solid-hc“ - only hard coal is considered,

- „solid-hc-DBB-no PM“ - hard coal and combustion technique are taken into account(here dry bottom boiler (DBB), without primary measures),

- „solid-hc-DBB-PM1“ - hard coal, DBB and primary measures are taken intoaccount with a reduction efficiency of 0.2 ,

- „solid-hc-DBB-PM2“ - hard coal, DBB and primary measures are taken intoaccount with a reduction efficiency of 0.45 ,

- „solid-hc-DBB-PM3“ - hard coal, DBB and primary measures are taken intoaccount with a reduction efficiency of 0.6 .

In Figure 3 a large difference between minimum and maximum emission factors indicateshigh uncertainties in the allocation of appropriate emission factors. A specification of



emission factors only concerning the type of fuel used (e.g. hard coal) is not sufficient. Therange of NOx emission factors for the combustion of pulverised coal is significantly reducedif technique related specifications are considered.

11 WEAKEST ASPECTS/PRIORITY AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT INCURRENT METHODOLOGY

The weakest aspects discussed here are related to the determination of emission factors.Methodological shortcomings are discussed in this section for the main pollutants SO2, NOX

and heavy metals.

11.1 SO2 emissions

The approach for the determination of SO2 emission factors is based on a simple mass

balance calculation as the formation mechanisms of sulphur dioxide within the boiler dependalmost entirely on the sulphur input. Therefore, for the formation of sulphur dioxide, fuelcharacteristics are of main influence. The accuracy of this approach is determined by thefollowing fuel parameters: lower heating value, fuel sulphur content and sulphur retention inash (see Equation (5)). The sulphur content and the lower heating value can be highly variablebetween different fuel categories and can furthermore vary to a large extent within one fuelcategory. Therefore, default values for sulphur content and lower heating value should beavoided. However, if emission factors for SO2 have to be calculated, representative values forthe sulphur content and the lower heating value should be based on measured data fromindividual fuel analysis.

The sulphur retention in ash αs depends mainly on the content of alkaline components of the

fuel. This is only relevant for coal (e.g. CaO, MgO, Na2O, K2O) and for the case of additive

injection. For a more precise determination of αs, the Ca/S ratio (amount of calcium/sulphur

content of fuel)8, the particulate diameter, the surface character of CaO, the temperature(optimum ca. 800 °C), the pressure, the residence time, etc. should be taken into account.Therefore, the assessment of αs should be based on an extended set of parameters.

Besides the fuel characteristics, the reduction efficiency and availability of secondarymeasures are of relevance for the determination of the SO2 emission factors. Default valuesare proposed in Table 7, but measured data from individual combustion plants shouldpreferably be used.

11.2 NOX EMISSIONS

The approach for the calculation of NOX emission factors is based on empirical relations. Forfuel-NO only fuel characteristics are taken into account. The formation of thermal-NOincreases exponentially with combustion temperatures above 1,300 °C (see /56/). At this

8 Alternatively the Ca/S ratio is defined as the amount of additives related to the sulphur content of the flue

gas, and is given for a brown coal fired dry bottom boiler as 2.5 - 5 as an example, for a stationary FBC as2 - 4, for a circulating FBC < 2 etc. /55/.



stage, no satisfactory result has been achieved to determine the thermal-NO formation byusing kinetic equations. For inventory purposes, an empirical parameter γ has been introduced(see Annex 5), which represents the fraction of thermal-NO formed. At this stage defaultvalues of γ depending on the type of boiler are given. Further work should focus on a moreprecise determination of this factor.

Load dependence of the pollutant NOx has been taken into account. For old installations aquantitative relation has been given as an example for German power plants. The validity ofthis relation should be verified for other countries.

Furthermore, the reduction efficiency of primary or secondary measures are of relevance forthe determination of NOx emission factors. Default values for reduction efficiencies andavailabilities are proposed in Tables 10 and 11, but measured data from individualcombustion plants should preferably be used.

11.3 Heavy metals

Heavy metals undergo complex transformations during the combustion process anddownstream of the boiler, referring to e.g. fly ash formation mechanisms. The approaches forthe determination of heavy metal emission factors are based on empirical relations, where fueland technical characteristics are of main influence. The heavy metal contents can be highlyvariable between different fuel categories (e.g. coal and heavy fuel oil) and can furthermorevary to a large extent within one fuel category (up to 2 orders of magnitude). Therefore,default values for heavy metal contents in fuel should be avoided and measured values shouldbe used as far as possible.

For inventory purposes, parameters, such as enrichment factors, fractions of fly ash leavingthe combustion chamber, fraction of heavy metals emitted in gaseous form, have beenintroduced. Further work should be invested into a more precise determination of theseparameters. In addition, it should be taken into account, that the reduction efficiency of (dust)abatement measures depends on the heavy metal. Heavy metal specific reduction efficienciesshould be determined.

11.4 Other aspects

Emission factors for SO2, NO2 and CO, whether calculated or given in the tables, are relatedto full load conditions. In order to assess the relevance of start-up emissions, a detailedinvestigation has been accomplished by using measured values from different types of boiler(see also Annex 15). The qualitative and quantitative statements obtained in this approachshould be verified.

The emission factors have been determined by considering the pollutants separately. Possiblemutual interactions between the formation mechanisms of different pollutants (e.g. NO andN2O) have been neglected and should be assessed in further work.



12 SPATIAL DISAGGREGATION CRITERIA FOR AREA SOURCES

This section is not relevant for combustion plants considered as point sources.

13 TEMPORAL DISAGGREGATION CRITERIA

The temporal disaggregation of annual emission data (top-down approach) provides a splitinto monthly, weekly, daily and hourly emission data. Temporal disaggregation of annualemissions released from combustion plants as point sources can be obtained from thetemporal change of the production of electrical power or the temporal change of theconsumption, taking into account a split into:

- summer and winter time,

- working days and holidays,

- standstill times,

- times of partial load behaviour and

- number of start-ups / type of load design.

This split should be carried out for defined categories of power plants which take into accountthe main relevant combinations of types of fuel used and types of boiler installed (similar splitas used for the emission factor Tables in Section 8).

The disaggregation of annual emissions into monthly, daily or hourly emissions can be basedon a step-by-step approach /76/ according to the following equations:

- Monthly emission:

EE

fMA

nn= ⋅

12(25)

EMnEmission in month n; n = 1, ..., 12 [Mg]

EA Annual emission [Mg]

fn Factor for month n; n = 1, ..., 12 [ ]

- Daily emission:

EE

Df

CFDM

kk

nn k

n

,= ⋅ ⋅ 1

(26)

EDn,kEmission of day k in month n; k = 1, ..., Dk ; n = 1, ..., 12 [Mg]

EMnEmission in month n; n = 1, ..., 12 [Mg]

Dk Number of days in month n [ ]

fk Factor for day k; k = 1, ..., Dk [ ]

CFn Correction factor for month n [ ]



- Hourly emission:

EE

fH

D

n ln k l

n k

, ,

,

,= ⋅24

(27)

EHn,k,lEmission in hour l in day k and month n; l = 1, ..., 24; k = 1, ..., Dk ; n = 1, ..., 12 [Mg]

EDn,kEmission of day k in month n; k = 1, ..., Dk ; n = 1, ..., 12 [Mg]

fn,l Factor for hour l in month n; l = 1, ..., 24; n = 1, ..., 12 [ ]

Dk Number of days in month n [ ]

The factors (relative activities) for month fn, day fk and hour fn,l can be related e.g. to the totalfuel consumption or the net electricity production in public power plants. Figure 4 gives anexample of a split for monthly factors based on the fuel consumption e.g. for Public PowerPlants:

0

0,5

1

1,5

2

2,5

3

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Month

Fac

tor

Figure 4: Example of monthly factors for total fuel consumption in Public Power Plants

A split concerning the load design, which determines the annual number of start-ups can begiven as follows (see also Table 11):

- Base load: The boiler/plant is normally in continuous operation during the year; start-ups occur relatively seldom (ca. 15 times per year) depending on maintenanceperiods which occur mostly in summer. The fuel mostly used in base load boilers isbrown coal.

- Middle load: The boiler/plant is in operation in order to meet the energy demand onworking days (Monday until Friday); start-ups can occur up to 150 times per year.The fuel mostly used in middle load boilers is hard coal.

- Peak load: The boiler/plant is in operation in order to meet the short term energydemand; start-ups can occur up to 200 times per year. The fuels mostly used in peakload boilers are gas or oil.



The allocation of power plants to the different load designs is given as an example in Figure5.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Load (net) in [thousand MW]

Other *

Oil and others

Natural gas

Hard coal incl.mixed combustion

Brown coal

Nuclear power plants

Hydrod. power plants

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 [Time]

Utilisation of power plant capacities on a winter day in West Germany

Daily voltage regulation

Load (net) in [thousand MW]

Operating hours

��

��

��

Base load

Middle load

Peak load

characteristic

*Other includes: Storage pump power plants, power supply from industry etc.

Figure 5: Load variation and arrangement of power plants according to the voltage regulationcharacteristic (cf. /117/, /118/).

It can be assumed that all power plants of a country with the same allocation of fuel, boilerand load have the same temporal behaviour.

14 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

15 SUPPLEMENTARY DOCUMENTS

15.1 Computer programme

A computer programme for the calculation of SO2 and NO2 emission factors for pulverisedcoal combustion has been designed, and is available on floppy disc. It has been designedunder MICROSOFT EXCEL 4.0 (English version). Default values for the required input dataare proposed to the user; a detailed users manual is given in Annex 14. For example, NOX

concentrations in [mg/m³] were calculated with the computer programme and presented



together with the emission factors in [g/GJ] as listed in Annexes 10 and 11. An integral partof the computer programme is the calculation of the flue gas volume as given in Annex 6.

15.2 LIST OF ANNEXES

Annex 1: Example of different possible considerations of boilers as a common plant

Annex 2: Determination of SO2 emission factors (flow sheet)

Annex 3: Determination of SO2 emission factors (description)

Annex 4: Determination of NOx emission factors (flow sheet)

Annex 5: Determination of NOx emission factors (description)

Annex 6: Determination of the specific flue gas volume (flow sheet and description)

Annex 7: Composition and lower heating value (Hu) of hard coal in coal miningcountries

Annex 8: Composition and lower heating value (Hu) of brown coal in coal miningcountries

Annex 9: Conditions for exemplary calculation of NOx emission factors

Annex 10: Emission factors and flue gas concentrations for NOx obtained by model

calculations (see Annexes 4 and 5) for hard coal (see Annex 7)

Annex 11: Emission factors and flue gas concentrations for NOx obtained by model

calculations (see Annexes 4 and 5) for brown coal (see Annex 8)

Annex 12: Comparison between measured and calculated SO2 and NOx emission data

Annex 13. Sensitivity analysis of the computer programme results

Annex 14: Users’ manual for the emission factor calculation programme (for versionSeptember, 1995)

Annex 15: Determination of start-up emissions and start-up emission factors.

Annex 16: List of abbreviations

16 VERIFICATION PROCEDURES

As outlined in the chapter “Concepts for Emission Inventory Verification“, different generalverification procedures can be recommended. The aim of this section is to develop specificverification procedures for emission data from combustion plants as point sources. The



verification procedures considered here are principally based on verification on a national andon a plant level. Moreover, it can be distinguished between the verification of activity data, ofemission factors and of emission data.

16.1 Verification on a national level

For combustion plants as point sources, emissions and activities have to be verified. The totalemissions from point sources are added together to obtain national total emissions (bottom-upapproach). These national total emissions should be compared to emission data derivedindependently (top-down approach). Independent emission estimates can be obtained by usingaverage emission factors and corresponding statistical data like the total fuel input for allsources, total thermal capacity, total heat or power produced, or by using emission estimatesfrom other sources (e.g. organisations like energy agencies).

The total fuel consumption should be reconciled with energy balances, which often havebreak-downs for large point sources (e.g. electricity, heat generation and industrial boilers).Furthermore, the total number of plants installed as well as their equipment should bechecked with national statistics.

Emission density comparisons can be achieved through comparison of e.g. emissions percapita or emissions per GDP with those of countries with a comparable economic structure.

16.2 Verification on a plant level

It should firstly be verified that separate inventories have been compiled for boilers,stationary engines, and gas turbines (according to SNAP code). The verification at plant levelrelies on comparisons between calculated emission factors and those derived from emissionmeasurements. An example for such a comparison is given in Annex 12.

17 REFERENCES

/1/ Bretschneider, B.: Paper presented at the second panel meeting, Karlsruhe; Oct. 21/22, 1993

/2/ Hietamäki, M.: Personal communication, October 21, 1993

/3/ Fontelle, J.-P.: Paper presented at the first panel meeting, Karlsruhe; Feb. 18/19, 1993

/4/ Umweltbundesamt (ed.): Daten zur Umwelt 1990/91; Berlin; 1992

/5/ Civin, V.: Personal communication, October 21, 1993

/6/ Pulles, M.P.J.: Emission Inventory in the Netherlands, Industrial Emissions for 1988; Ministry ofHousing, Physical Planning and Environment (ed.); s´-Gravenhage; Dec. 1992

/7/ Berdowski, J.J.M.: Combustion Emissions from Large Combustion Plants in the Netherlands in 1990 and1991; Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment (ed.); s´-Gravenhage; March 1993

/8/ Paper presented by Mr. Debski at the first panel meeting: „Electricity generation and emission statistics";Karlsruhe; Feb. 18/19, 1993



/9/ Council Directive of 24 November 1988 on the limitation of emissions of certain pollutants into the airfrom large combustion plants (88/699/EEC)

/10/ Proceedings of the second meeting of the UN-ECE Task Force on Heavy Metal Emissions, Prague,October 15 - 17, 1991

/11/ Neckarwerke Elektrizitätsversorgungs-AG, Kraftwerk Walheim, Block 2: Demonstrationsanlage zurReduzierung von NOx-Emissionen aus Schmelzkammerkessel mit Ascherückführung, Abschlußbericht,

Gesch.-Z: II 1.1-50441-1/43

/12/ Clarke, L.B.; Sloss, L.L.:Trace Element - Emissions from Coal Combustion and Gasification, IEA CoalResearch, Rep.-Nr. IEACR, 1992

/13/ DeSoete, G.; Sharp, B.: Nitrous oxide emissions: Modifications as a consequence of current trends inindustrial fossil fuel combustion and in land use; Commission of the European Communities (ed.),Brussels, Luxemburg, 1991

/14/ Andersson, Curt; Brännström-Norberg, Britt-Marie; Hanell, Bengt: Nitrous oxide emissions fromdifferent combustion sources; Swedish State Power Broad, Vaellingby (Schweden), 1989

/15/ DIN 51603: Flüssige Brennstoffe; Teil 1: Heizöl EL, Mindestanforderungen (1995); Teil 2: Heizöle L, Tund M, Anforderungen an die Prüfung (1992)

/16/ VDI Richtlinie 2297: Emissionsminderung; Ölbefeuerte Dampf- und Heißwassererzeuger; 1982

/17/ Kolar, Jürgen; Stickstoffoxide und Luftreinhaltung, Springer Verlag Berlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1990

/18/ Rentz, O; Dorn, R.; Holschumacher, R.; Padberg, C.: Application of advanced SO2 and NOx emission

control technologies at stationary combustion installations in OECD countries; Institute for IndustrialProduction, University of Karlsruhe; June 1992

/19/ Rentz, O.; Ribeiro, J.: NOx Task Force - Operating Experience with NOx Abatement at Stationary

Sources; Report for the ECE; Dec. 1992

/20/ Gutberlet, H: Measurement of heavy metal removal by a flue gas desulfurization plant working by thelime scrubbing method, Research report No. ENV-492-D(B), Luxembourg, Commission of the EuropeanCommunities, 1988

/21/ Maier, H.; Dahl, P.; Gutberlet, H.; Dieckmann, A.: Schwermetalle in kohlebefeuerten Kraftwerken, VGBKraftwerkstechnik, 72(1992)5, S. 439

/22/ Fahlke, J.: Untersuchungen zum Verhalten von Spurenelementen an kohlebefeuerten Dampferzeugernunter Berücksichtigung der Rauchgaseinigungsanlagen, VGB Kraftwerkstechnik, 73(1993)3, S. 254

/23/ Gutberlet, H.; Spiesberger, A.; Kastner, F.; Tembrink, J.: Zum Verhalten des Spurenelements Quecksilberin Steinkohlenfeuerungen mit Rauchgasreinigungsanlagen, VGB Kraftwerkstechnik, 72(1992)7, S. 636 -641

/24/ Rentz, O.; Holtmann, T.; Oertel, D.; Röll, C. et al: Konzeption zur Minderung der VOC-Emissionen inBaden-Württemberg; Umweltministerium Baden-Württemberg (ed.); Heft 21; Karlsruhe (Germany),1993

/25/ Hulgaard, Tore: Nitrous Emissions from Danish Power Plants; Danmarks Tekuiske Hoejkole, Lyngby(Denmark); Institute for Kemiteknik, 1990



/26/ Clayton, Russ; Sykes, Alston; Machilek, Rudi; Krebs, Ken; Ryan, Jeff: NO Field study; prepared for theUS-EPA; Research Triangle Park (NC), 1989

/27/ Bonn, B.: NOx-Emissionen bei Wirbelschichtfeuerungen; VDI-Berichte Nr. 1081; Düsseldorf (Germany),1993

/28/ Economic Commission for Europe: NOx Task Force - Technologies for Controlling NOx Emissions from

Stationary Sources, April 1986

/29/ UN-ECE Task Force on Heavy Metal Emissions: State-of-the-Art Report; 1994

/30/ IEA-coal research (ed.): The problems on sulphur; London 1989

/31/ EVT Energie- und Verfahrenstechnik GmbH (ed.): Taschenbuch; Stuttgart, 1990

/32/ Reidick, H.: Primärmaßnahmen zur NOx-Minderung bei Neu- und Altanlagen als Voraussetzung für

optimale Sekundärmaßnahmen; in: Sammelband VGB-Konferenz "Kraftwerk und Umwelt 1985", p. 129-135

/33/ Reidick, H.: Erfahrungen mit primärer und sekundärer NOx-Minderung der Abgase von Dampferzeuger-

Feuerungen; in: EV-Register 45/86, S. 39 - 50

/34/ Rüsenberg, D.; Hein, K.; Hoppe, K.: Feuerungsseitige Maßnahmen zur Minderung der NOx-Emission; in:

VGB-Kraftwerkstechnik 67 (1987) 3, S. 275-279

/35/ van der Most, P.F.J.; Veldt, C.: Emission Factors Manual PARCOM-ATMOS, Emission factors for airpollutants 1992, Final version; TNO and Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and the Environment,Air and Energy Directorate Ministry of Transport and Water Management; The Netherlands; Referencenumber 92 - 235; 1992

/36/ Jockel, W.; Hartje, J.: Die Entwicklung der Schwermetallemissionen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschlandvon 1985 bis 1995; Forschungsbericht 94-104 03 524; TÜV Rheinland e. V. Köln; 1995

/37/ Stobbelaar, G.: Reduction of Atmospheric Emissions under the terms of the North Sea ActionProgramme, Report Lucht 102, Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment, TheNetherlands, 1992

/38/ Bouchereau, J.M.: Estimation des Emissions Atmosphériques de Métaux Lourds en France pour leChrome, le Cuivre, le Nickel, le Plomb et le Zinc, CITEPA, France (1992)

/39/ Axenfeld, F.; Münch. J.; Pacyna, J.M.; Duiser, J.; Veldt, C.: Test-Emissionsdatenbasis derSpurenelemente As, Cd, Hg, Pb, Zn und der speziellen organischen Verbindungen Lindan, HCB, PCBund PAK für Modellrechnungen in Europa, Forschungsbericht 104 02 588, Dornier GmbH, NILU, TNO,1992

/40/ Marx, E.: Reduzierung von Emissionen und Beseitigung von Rückständen unter Berücksichtigungernergetischer Nutzung; in: Die Industriefeuerung; 49 (1989); S. 75 - 87

/41/ CORINAIR 90 Emission Inventory (Proposals) - working paper for the 19 - 20 September 1991 meeting -Annex 4: Definition of Large Point Sources

/42/ Hernández, R.; Martínez, J.; Ortiz, A.: CORINAIR Relational schema and data dictionary 1st version;AED; March 1992



/43/ Fontelle, J-P.: The Implementation of the Directive 88/609 on Large Combustion Plants - Proposal for theachievement of air emission inventories, CORINAIR (ed.); Nov. 1991

/44/ Fontelle, J-P.: The Implementation of the Directive 88/609 on Large Combustion Plants - LCP Directiveinventory reporting; CITEPA (ed.); June 1992

/45/ Necker, Peter; Lehmann, Bernhard: Kraftwerk Walheim, Block 2 - Demonstrationsanlage zurReduzierung von NOx-Emissionen aus Schmelzkammerkesseln mit Ascherückführung; Neckarwerke

Elektrizitäts-versorgung AG; i. Zusammenarbeit mit Umweltbundesamt Berlin; Esslingen, 1992

/46/ VDI (ed.): Efficient Energy Supply with Combustion - Engine Plants; Part II; Aachen; 1993

/47/ Brandt, F: Brennstoffe und Verbrennungsrechnung, FDBR - Fachbuchreihe; Vol. 1; Essen; 1981

/48/ N.N.: Ruhrkohlenhandbuch; Verlag Glückauf GmbH, Essen, 1984, 6th Edition, p. 118

/49/ Wagner, W.: Thermische Apparate und Dampferzeuger - Planung und Berechnung; Vogel - FachbuchTechnik, Würzburg 1985

/50/ Schnell, U.: Berechnung der Stickoxidemissionen von Kohlenstaubfeuerungen; VDI Reihe 6:Energieerzeugung Nr. 250, Düsseldorf 1991

/51/ Pohl, J.H.; Chen, S.L.; Heap, M.P.; Pershing, D.W.: Correlation of NOx Emissions with Basic Physical

and Chemical Characteristics of Coal; in: Joint Symposium on Stationary Combustion NOx Control,

Volume 2, Palo Alto 1982, S. (36-1) - (36-30).

/52/ Davis, W.T.; Fiedler, M.A.: The Retention of Sulfur in Fly Ash from Coal-Fired Boilers; in: Journal ofthe Air Pollution Control Association (JAPCA), 32 (1982), p. 395 - 397

/53/ Heer, W.: Zur Konfiguration von Emissionsminderungsmaßnahmen an Kohlekraftwerken, DissertationUniversität Karlsruhe 1987

/54/ Zelkowski, J: Kohleverbrennung; Fachbuchreihe "Kraftwerkstechnik", Vol. 8, Essen 1986

/55/ Görner, K.: Technische Verbrennungssysteme - Grundlagen, Modellbildung, Simulation; Springer VerlagBerlin, Heidelberg, New York, 1991

/56/ Leuckel, W.; Römer, R.: Schadstoffe aus Verbrennungsprozessen; in: VDI Berichte Nr. 346, 1979, S. 323- 347

/57/ Hansen, U.: Update and Temporal Resolution of Emissions from Power Plants; in: GENEMIS, Paperpresented at the 3rd GENEMIS Workshop, Vienna 1993

/58/ CITEPA (ed.): CORINAIR Inventory - Default Emission Factor Handbook, Commission of the EuropeanCommunity (ed.), second edition, January 1992

/59/ US-EPA (ed.): Compilation of Air Pollutant Emission Factor, Vol. 1; Stationary Point and Area Sources;1985

/60/ Pacyna, Josef: Emission Inventorying for Heavy Metals in the ECE; Draft Paper for the Final Report ofthe Task Force on Heavy Metals Emission; 1994

/61/ IPCC/OECD (ed.): Greenhouse Gas Inventory Workbook, IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse GasInventories, Volume 2; 1995



/62/ Ribeiro, Jacqueline: Techno-economic analysis of the SCR plant for NOx abatement; University of

Karlsruhe; Institute for Industrial Production; 1992

/63/ Umweltbundesamt, Germany (ed.): Umwelt- und Gesundheitskritierien für Quecksilber; UBA-Berichte5/80; Berlin 1980

/64/ Personal communications with different power plant operators; answers to a questionnaire from March 8,1994

/65/ Deutsche Verbundgesellschaft e. V. (ed.): Das versorgungsgerechte Verhalten der thermischenKraftwerke; Heidelberg; 1991

/66/ TNO report 88 - 355/R 22/ CAP included in /58/

/67/ Winiwater, D.; Schneider, M.: Abschätzung der Schwermetallemissionen in Österreich;Umweltbundesamt Österreich, Wien; 1995

/68/ VDI (ed.): Gasturbineneinsatz in der Kraft-Wärme-Kopplung; Rationelle Energieversorgung mitVerbrennungs-Kraftmaschinen-Anlagen; Teil V; Aachen; 1993

/69/ Veaux, C.; Rentz, O.: Entwicklung von Gasturbinen und Gasturbinenprozessen; Institut fürIndustriebetriebslehre und Industrielle Produktion; Karlsruhe; 1994 (unpublished)

/70/ VDI (ed.): Co-generation Technology-Efficient Energy Supply with Combustion Engine Plants; Part II;Aachen; 1993

/71/ VGB (ed.): Hinweise zur Ausfertigung der Emissionserklärung für Anlagen aus dem Bereich der Kraft-und Energiewirtschaft gemäß 11. Verordnung zur Durchführung des Bundesimmissionsschutzgesetzesvom 12.12.1991 (Stand März 1993); Essen; 1993

/72/ Association of German Coal Importers / Verein Deutscher Kohleimporteure e.V.: DatenbankKohleanalysen; Stand 27. Januar 1992; Hamburg (Germany)

/73/ ASTM-ISO 3180-74: Standard Method for Calculating Coal and Coke Analyses from as-determined todifferent Bases

/74/ N. N.: Update and Temporal Resolution of Emissions from Power Plants in GENEMIS; Paper publishedat the 3rd Genemis-Workshop in Vienna; 1983

/75/ Bartok, W. et. al.: Stationary sources und control of nitrogen oxide emissions; Proc. second InternationalClean Air Congress; Washington; 1970; p. 801 - 818.

/76/ N. N.: Update and Temporal Resolution of Emissions from Power Plants, in: GENEMIS; Paper from the3rd Workshop; Vienna; 1993

/77/ Bundesministerium für Umwelt, Naturschutz und Reaktorsicherheit (ed.): Umwelt-politik - Klimaschutzin Deutschland, Erster Bericht der Regierung der Bundesrepublik Deutschland nach dem Rahmen-übereinkommen der Vereinten Nationen über Klimaänderungen; 1994The Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety (ed.): EnvironmentalPolicy - Climate Protection in Germany - First Report of the Federal Government of the Federal Republicof Germany according to the United Nations Framework Convention of Climate Change, 1994

/78/ Boelitz, J.; Esser-Schmittmann, W.; Kreusing, H.: Braunkohlenkoks zur Abgasreinigung; in: Entsorger-Praxis (1993)11; S. 819 - 821

/79/ Breton, D.; Eberhard, R.: Handbuch der Gasverwendungstechnik, Oldenburg 1987



/80/ CITEPA: CORINAIR Inventory-Default Emission Factors Handbook (second edition); CEC-DG XI(ed.); 1992

/81/ Davids, P.; Rouge M.: Die Großfeuerungsanlagenverordnung. Technischer Kommentar; VDI, Düsseldorf1984

/82/ Davids, Peter; Rouge, Michael: Die TA Luft ´86, Technischer Kommentar; Düsseldorf; 1986

/83/ DeSoete, G.: Nitrous Oxide from Combustion and Industry: Chemistry, Emissions and Control; WorkingGroup Report: Methane Emissions from Biomass Burning; in: van Amstel, A.R. (ed.): Proceedings of anInternational IPCC Workshop on Methane and Nitrous Oxide: Methods in National Emission Inventoriesand Options for Control. RIVM Report no. 481507003; Bilthoven (The Netherlands); p. 324 - 325

/84/ Environment Agency: Air polluters unveiled by Tokio Government, Japan; Environment Summary 1973-1982, Vol. 1, (1973); p. 18/19

/85/ US-EPA (ed.): Criteria Pollutant Emission Factors for the NAPAP Emission Inventory; EPA/600/7-87/015; 1987

/86/ Gerold, F. et. al.: Emissionsfaktoren für Luftverunreinigungen; Materialien 2/80; Berlin; 1980

/87/ IPCC/OECD (ed.): Joint Work Programme on National Inventories of Greenhouse Gas Emissions:National GHG-Inventories (ed.): Transparency in estimation and reporting; Parts I and II; Final report ofthe workshop held 1 October 1992 in Bracknell (U.K.); published in Paris; 1993

/88/ IPCC/OECD (ed.): Greenhouse Gas Inventory Reference Manual; IPCC Guidelines for NationalGreenhouse Gas Inventories, Volume 3; 1995

/89/ Kamm, Klaus; Bauer, Frank; Matt, Andreas: CO-Emissionskataster 1990 für den Stadtkreis Karlsruhe; in:WLB - Wasser, Luft und Boden (1993)10; p. 58 ff.

/90/ Kremer, H.: NOx-Emissionen aus Feuerungsanlagen und aus anderen Quellen; in: Kraftwerk und Umwelt

1979; Essen; 1979; p. 163 - 170

/91/ Lim, K.J. et. al.: A promising NOx-control-technology; Environmental Progress, Vol. 1; Nr.3; 1982; p.

167 - 177

/92/ Landesanstalt für Immissionsschutz des Landes NRW (ed.): Emissionsfaktoren für Feuerungsanlagen fürfeste Brennstoffe; in: Gesundheits-Ingenieur 98(1987)3; S. 58 - 68

/93/ Landesanstalt für Immissionsschutz des Landes NRW (ed.): Erstellung eines Emissionskatasters und einerEmissionsprognose für Feuerungsanlagen im Sektor Haushalte und Kleinverbraucher desBelastungsgebietes Ruhrgebiet Ost; LIS Bericht Nr. 73; 1987

/94/ Marutzky, R: Emissionsminderung bei Feuerungsanlagen für Festbrennstoffe; in: Das Schornsteinfeger-handwerk (1989)3, S. 7 - 15

/95/ Ministerium für Arbeit, Gesundheit und Soziales des Landes NRW (ed.): Luftreinhalteplan RuhrgebietOst 1979-1983; Luftreinhalteplan Ruhrgebiet Mitte 1980-1984; Düsseldorf; 1978 bzw. 1980

/96/ Mobley, J.D.; Jones G.D.: Review of U.S. NOx abatement technology; Proceedings: NOx-Symposium

Karlsruhe 1985 B1/B 74

/97/ MWV: Jahreszahlen 1992, Hamburg 1992



/98/ N.N.: Untersuchung zur Emissionsbegrenzung bei bestimmten Anlagenarten; in: Umweltschutz inNiedersachsen - Reinhaltung der Luft, Heft 8; S. 145 - 169

/99/ Ministry of Housing, Physical Planning and Environment (ed.): Handbook of Emission Factors,Stationary Combustion Sources, Part 3; The Netherlands, The Hague; 1988

/100/ OECD Environment Directorate (ed.): Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Emission Factors; 1989

/101/ van der Most, P. F J.; Veldt, L.: Emission Factors Manual Parcom-Atmos, Emission factors for airpollutants 1992; Final version; TNO; The Netherlands; Reference number 92 - 235, 1992

/102/ Radian Corporation (ed.): Emissions and Cost Estimates for Globally Significant AnthropogenicCombustion Sources of NOx, N2O, CH4, CO and CO2; Prepared for the Office of Research and

Development; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; Washington D.C.; 1990

/103/ Ratajczak, E.-A.; Akland, E.: Emissionen von Stickoxiden aus kohlegefeuerten Hausbrandfeuerstätten; in:Staub, Reinhaltung Luft; 47(1987)1/2, p. 7 - 13

/104/ Riediger, Bruno: Die Verarbeitung des Erdöls, Springer-Verlag 1971, p. 31

/105/ Schenkel, W.; Barniske, L.; Pautz, D.; Glotzel, W.-D.: Müll als CO-neutrale Energieresource; in:Kraftwerkstechnik 2000 - Resourcen-Schonung und CO-Minderung; VGB-Tagung 21./22.2.1990; p. 108

/106/ Skuschka, M; Straub, D.; Baumbach, C.: Schadstoffemissionen aus Kleinfeuerungen; Institut fürVerfahrenstechnik und Dampfkesselwesen; Abt. für Reinhaltung der Luft; Stuttgart; 1988

/107/ Steinmüller-Taschenbuch -Dampferzeugertechnik, Essen 1984

/108/ Stromthemen, 6(1989)6, p. 7

/109/ Tornier, W.: Derzeit erreichbare Emissionswerte von Kesselanlagen und ihre Minderung durchPrimärmaßnahmen; VDI-GET-VK-Tagung: Kessel- und Prozeßwärmeanlagen; Essen; 1985

/110/ Umweltbundesamt (ed.): Luftreinhaltung 1981; Berlin; 1981

/111/ Umweltbundesamt (ed.): Jahresbericht 1985; Berlin; 1986

/112/ VGB Technische Vereinigung der Großkraftwerksbetreiber e.V. (ed.): VGB- Handbücher VGB-B301:NOx-Bildung und NOx-Minderung bei Dampferzeugern für fossile Brennstoffe; Essen; 1986

/113/ CEE (ed.): Directive du Conseil du 30 mars 1987 modifiant la directive 75/716/CEE relative aurapprochement des législations des Ètats membres concernant la teneur en soufre de certainscombustibles liquides, 87/219/CEE

/114/ Meijer, Jeroen: Personal communication, IEA (International Energy Agency), Fax of April 24, 1995.

/115/ US-EPA (ed.): AP 42 - CD rom, 1994

/116/ Personal communication with power plant operators in Germany, 1995

/117/ Verein Deutscher Elektrizitätswerke (VDEW) (ed.): Jahresstatistik 1991; Frankfurt; 1992

/118/ Kugeler, F.; Philippen, P.: Energietechnik; 1990



18 BIBLIOGRAPHY

Additional literature, which is related to combustion:

Strauß sen., K.: NOx-Bildung und NOx-Minderung bei Dampferzeugern für fossile Brennstoffe, VGB - B

301, Part B 5.1; Essen; 1986

Zelkowski, J.: NOx-Bildung bei der Kohleverbrennung und NOx-Emissionen aus Schmelzfeuerungen, in:

VGB Kraftwerkstechnik 66 (1986) 8, S. 733 - 738

Rennert, K. D.: Mögliche Seiten der Stickstoffreduzierung in Feuerräumen; Sonderdruck aus FachreportRauchgasreinigung 2/86, S. FR 13 - 17

Schreiner, W.: Rennert, K. D.: Emissionsverhalten von Brennern mit Luftstufung in Groß- undVersuchsanlagen, in: BWK Bd. 40 (1988) 5, Mai 1988

Visser, B.M.; Bakelmann, F.C.: NOx-Abatement in Gas Turbine Installations; in: Erdöl und Kohle-Erdgas-Petrochemie vereinigt mit Brennstoff-Chemie, 46 (1993) 9, S. 333 - 335

Alaghon, H.; Becker, B.: Schadstoffarme Verbrennung von Kohlegas in GuD-Anlagen; in: VGBKraftwerkstechnik, 64 (1984) 11, S. 999 - 1064

Arbeitsgruppe Luftreinhaltung der Universität Stuttgart (ed.): Verbrennungsmotoren und Feuerungen-Emissionsminderung; in: Jahresbericht der Arbeitsgruppe Luftreinhaltung; Stuttgart 1988

Scherer, R.: Konzept zur Rauchgasreinigung bei schwerölbetriebenen Motorheizkraftwerken; in: BWK 45(1993) 11, S. 473 - 476

N.N.: NOx-Emissions by Stationary Internal Combustion Engines; in: Erdöl und Kohle-Erdgas-

Petrochemie vereinigt mit Brennstoff-Chemie, 40 (1987) 9, p. 375 - 376

Kehlhofer, R.; Kunze, N.; Lehmann, J.; Schüller, K.-H.: Gasturbinenkraftwerke, Kombikraftwerke,Heizkraftwerke und Industriekraftwerke; Köln 1984, 1992

19 RELEASE VERSION, DATE AND SOURCE

Version: 3.1

Date: November 1995

Source: Otto Rentz; Dagmar OertelUniversity of Karlsruhe (TH)Germany

20 POINT OF ENQUIRY

Any comments on this chapter or enquiries should be directed to:

Ute Karl

French-German Institute for Environmental Research



University of KarlsruheHertzstr 16D-76187 KarlsruheGermany

Tel: +49 721 608 4590Fax: +49 721 75 89 09Email: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



Annex 1: Example of different possible considerations for boilers as a common plant

Two point sources according to SNAP 03 01 02

stack stack

Boiler Boiler Boiler

100 MW* 150 MW* 100 MW*

Statio-

nary Gas-

en- tur- Process Process

gine bine furnace furnace

Industrial Combustion*thermal capacity

Area source Area source Area source

according to according to according toSNAP 03 01 05 SNAP 03 01 04 SNAP 03 02 01

One point source according to SNAP 03 01 01

stack stack

Boiler Boiler Boiler

100 MW* 150 MW* 100 MW*

Statio-

nary Gas-

en- tur- Process Process

gine bine furnace furnace

Industrial Combustion*thermal capacity

Area source Area source Area source

according to according to according toSNAP 03 01 05 SNAP 03 01 04 SNAP 03 02 01



Annex 2: Determination of SO2 emission factors (flow sheet, for description see Annex 3)

Default values ofvarious

CS

[kg/kg]in fuel

HU

of fuelavailabl

C 2 CSOkgkg S2max fuel

= ⋅

Default values of αs

for

αS

availabl

[ ] ( )SSOkgkg

SO 1CCmax2Boiler2

α−⋅=

η, βavailable

Default values of η andβ for different secondary

[ ] ( )βη ⋅−⋅= 1CCBoiler2sec2 SOkg

kgSO

EF C 10SOg

GJ SO1

H6

2 2sec u= ⋅ ⋅ C C 10SO

mg

m SO1

V6

2 3 2sec FG= ⋅ ⋅

C CSOmg

m SO21 O

21 O2ref3 2

2ref

2= ⋅ −

−

yes

no

no

yes

no

yes

no

yes

Determination of VFG

see

no abatement



Annex 3: Determination of SO2 emission factors (description)

The calculation procedure is performed in three steps:

I The fuel sulphur reacts stoichiometrically with oxygen O2 to sulphur dioxide SO2. Default

values for the sulphur content CSfuel in hard and brown coal are given in Annexes 7 and 8.

The result is the maximum attainable amount of sulphur dioxide CSO2.max given by:

C 2 CSO S2max fuel= ⋅ (3-1)

CSfuelsulphur content of fuel (in mass element/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CSO2.maxmaximum attainable amount of sulphur dioxide (in mass pollutant/mass fuel [kg/kg])

II The maximum attainable amount of sulphur dioxide CSO2.max is corrected by the sulphur

retention in ash αs. As a result, the real boiler emission of sulphur dioxide CSO boiler2, fuel is

obtained:

( )sSOSO 1CCmax2boiler2

α−⋅= (3-2)

CSO boiler2.real boiler emission of sulphur dioxide (in mass pollutant/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CSO2.maxmaximum attainable amount of sulphur dioxide (in mass pollutant/mass fuel [kg/kg])

αs sulphur retention in ash [ ]

The sulphur retention in ash depends e.g. on fuel characteristics and temperature inside theboiler. If there is no data for αs available, default values for various fuels are given in

Table 8.

III The boiler emission of sulphur dioxide is corrected by the reduction efficiency η andavailability β (for definition of β see Section 3.2) of the secondary measure installed,according to:

( )βη ⋅−⋅= 1CCboiler2sec2 SOSO (3-3)

CSO2.secsulphur dioxide downstream secondary measure (in mass pollutant/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CSO boiler2.real boiler emission of sulphur dioxide (in mass pollutant/mass fuel [kg/kg])

η reduction efficiency of secondary measure [ ]

β availability of secondary measure [ ]

The result is called secondary sulphur dioxide CSO2.sec. If there is no data for η and β

available, default values for various flue gas desulphurisation techniques (FGD) are givenin Table 7.

The obtained CSO2.sec value is converted to CSO2

in flue gas and to the emission factor

EFSO2 according to the following Equations:



C C 10SO SO6

2 2.sec= ⋅ ⋅1

VFG

(3-4)

EF C 10SO SO6

2 2.sec= ⋅ ⋅1

Hu

(3-5)

CSO2sulphur dioxide in flue gas (in mass pollutant/volume flue gas [mg/m3])

CSO2.secsulphur dioxide downstream of secondary measure (in mass pollutant/mass fuel [kg/kg])

VFG dry flue gas volume volume (in volume flue gas/mass fuel [m3/kg])

EFSO2emission factor for sulphur dioxide [g/GJ]

Hu lower heating value [MJ/kg]

The dry flue gas volume VFG can be determined according to Annex 6. Emission data in

[mg/m3] are useful to compare measured and calculated values. The same equations areused for the unit conversion of CSO2.boiler

. Default values for the lower heating values of hard

and brown coal are given in Annexes 7 and 8.



Annex 4: Determination of NOx emission factors (flow sheet, for description see Annex 5)

[ ] 6V1

NOm

mgNO 10CC

Dsec23

2⋅⋅=

C CNOmg

m NO21 O

21 O2ref3

FG 2

2r

2= ⋅ −

−

[ ] FGH1

NOGJg

NO VCEFu22⋅⋅=

CN

in fuel[kg/kg]

Default values for the fuel composition

[ ]FGfuel

3maxfuel V

11430

Nm

kgNO CC ⋅⋅=

[ ] ( ) ( ) [ ] ( ) [ ]

⋅⋅−

⋅⋅+⋅+= 3,200

C

0.6

C

3,200

C

0.4C

0.015

C

kgmg

fuel,convNOkgmg

maxfuel,NOfixCkgmg

maxfuel,NOvolatilesfuelN 8401801,280285C

formationof NOthermal

available

[ ] ( )1CCconvfuel,ertotal.Boil NOkg

kgNO +⋅= γ

C CNOkgkg NO

432Boiler total,Boiler

= ⋅

η prim

available

[ ] ( )primNOkgkg

NO 1CCBoiler2prim2

η−⋅=

Default values for the formation of NOthermal

Default values of ηprim per single orcombined primary measure

( ) volatileC C100%wtCfix

−=−

Cvolatile

available

Hu

of fuelavailable

ηsec, βsec

available

Default values of ηsec andβsec per secondary measure

[ ] ( )βη ⋅−⋅= 1CCprim2sec2 NOkg

kgNO

no abatement measures

Determination of VFG

see Annex 6

nono n

no

no

no

yes

yes

yesyesyes

yes



Annex 5: Determination of NOx emission factors (description)

The determination of NOx emission factors takes into account the formation of fuel-NO andthermal-NO. The formation of fuel-NO is based on fuel parameters. But the total amount offuel-nitrogen cannot be completely converted into fuel-NO (as obtained in Equation (5-1)).Therefore, the realistic formation of fuel-NO is described by an empirical relation (seeEquation (5-2)). The formation of thermal-NO is expressed by an an additional fraction whichdepends on the type of boiler.

The calculation procedure of the NOx emission factor is performed in three steps: In the first

step the maximum NO emission resulting from stoichiometric conversion of fuel nitrogen iscalculated. The NO emission obtained is further corrected by taking into account theformation of thermal-NO. NO is converted into NO2 and primary and secondary measures aretaken into account in steps two and three.

I The fuel-nitrogen reacts in a stoichiometric manner with oxygen O2 to form nitrogen

oxide. The default values for the nitrogen content CN2fuel in hard and brown coal are given

in Annexes 7 and 8. The maximum attainable amount of fuel nitrogen oxide CNOfuel.max is

obtained:

C CNO Nfuelmax fuel

30

14= ⋅ ⋅ 1

VFG

(5-1)

CNOfuel.maxmaximum attainable amount of fuel nitrogen oxide (in mass pollutant/volume flue gas [kg/m3])

CNfuel

nitrogen content in fuel (in mass nitrogen/mass fuel [kg/kg])

VFG specific flue gas volume (in volume flue gas/mass fuel [m3/kg])9

The fuel-nitrogen content CNfuel is not completely converted into CNOfuel

. The converted

part of fuel-nitrogen to fuel-NO CNOfuel conv. can be determined by the following empirical

formula /50, 51/ related to zero percent of oxygen in dry flue gas:

−

+

+=

3,200

C

0.6

C840

3,200

C

0.4

C180

0.015

C1,280285C maxfuelfixmaxfuel

convfuel

NOCNOvolatilesN

NOfuel (5-2)

CNOfuel conv.fuel-NO released (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [mg/kg])2

CNfuel

nitrogen content in fuel (in mass nitrogen/mass fuel [kg/kg]), maf

Cvolatiles fuel content of volatiles (in mass volatiles/mass fuel [kg/kg]), maf

CNOfuel.maxmaximum attainable amount of fuel nitrogen oxide (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [mg/kg])10

CCfixfixed carbon in fuel (in mass carbon/ mass fuel [kg/kg]), maf

9 The programme calculates stoichiometrically the specific flue gas volume based on the complete fuel

composition.

10 Note: CNO.fuel.max and CNO.fuel.conv are given in the unit (mass pollutant/mass flue gas [mg/kg]). For theconversion between (mass pollutant/mass flue gas [mg/kg]) and (mass pollutant/volume flue gas [kg/m3]) theflue gas density (in mass flue gas/volume flue gas [kg/m³]) has to be taken into account, which is calculatedstoichiometrically from the fuel composition within the computer programme.



The fixed carbon in the fuel is determined according to the equation CCfix = 1 - Cvolatiles .

Equation (5-2) is valid for nitrogen oxide emissions from premixed flames; the

coefficient of correlation is r2 = 0.9 for 20 coals and r2 = 0.75 for 46 coals /51/. The datahas been obtained by field and pilot-scale measurements. Basically tests are conducted ina 70,000 Btu/hr (20.5 kW) refractory lined furnace with variable heat extraction. Coalwas injected through special configurations. A nozzle produces an uniformheterogeneous mixture of coal and air prior to combustion and represents the limit ofintensely mixed flames produced with high swirl. Further tests have been established inlarge scale furnaces. The results from all measurements combined with additionalinformation based on literature data have been used to establish a correlation whichpredicts the relative dependence of nitrogen oxide emissions on fuel properties. /51/Further calculations with Equation (5-2) based on measured data have been provided in/50/. The comparison between measured and calculated values has shown that the resultsfrom Equation (5-2) are very good for high volatile coals and are satisfactory for mediumvolatile coals /50/.

Assuming that the formation of fuel-NO is much more important than the formation ofthermal-NO (fuel-NO amounts to 70 - 90 %), the content of thermal-NO formed can beexpressed as a fraction γ (where γ depends on the type of boiler) of NOfuel. The total

content of nitrogen oxide formed in the boiler CNOtotal boiler. is given by:

( )γ+⋅=+= 1CCCCconvfuelthermalconvfuelboilertotal NONONONO (5-3)

CNOtotal boiler.total content of nitrogen oxide formed in the boiler (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

CNOfuel conv.fuel-NO released (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

CNOthermalcontent of thermal-NO formed (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

γ fraction for thermal-NO formed [ ]

The following default values for γ can be recommended: DBB γ = 0.05, WBB γ = 0.3.Furthermore, the amount of thermal-NO can be influenced by load (see also Section11.2).

The total boiler emissions of nitrogen dioxide CNO boiler2. can be calculated as follows:

C C46

30NO NO2boiler totalboiler= ⋅ (5-4)

CNOboiler2

total content of nitrogen dioxide formed in the boiler (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

CNOtotalboilertotal content of nitrogen oxide formed in the boiler (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

II The total boiler content of nitrogen dioxide given by CNO boiler2. is reduced by taking into

account primary measures with the reduction efficiency ηprim. The result is the content

of primary nitrogen dioxide CNO prim2.:



( )primNONO 1CCboiler2prim2

η−⋅= (5-5)

CNO prim2.content of primary nitrogen dioxide (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

CNOboiler2


ηprim reduction efficiency of primary measure(s) [ ]

As there is only incomplete data available for reduction efficiencies, default values aregiven for the individual and relevant combinations of primary measures for differenttypes of boilers and fuels (see Table 8). In the case of combined primary measures withknown individual reduction efficiencies ηprim,1, ηprim,2, etc., the following equation

can be used:

( ) ( ) ( )prim3prim2prim1NONO 111CCboiler2prim2

ηηη −⋅−⋅−⋅= (5-6)

CNO prim2.content of nitrogen dioxide taking into account primary measures (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas

[kg/kg])

CNOboiler2


ηprimkindividual reduction efficiency of primary measure k [ ]

It should be taken into account, that the reduction efficiencies of primary measures arenot independent of each other.

III The emission of primary nitrogen dioxide CNO prim2. is corrected by the reduction

efficiency ηsec [ ] and the availability βsec [ ] (for definition of β see Section 3.2) of the

secondary measure installed, according to:

( )secsecNONO 1CC2.primsec2

βη ⋅−⋅= (5-7)

CNO2.secnitrogen dioxide downstream of secondary measure (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

CNO prim2.content of nitrogen dioxide taking into account primary measures (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas

[kg/kg])


βsec availability of secondary measure [ ]

If there is no data for ηsec and βsec available, default values for various DeNOx

techniques are given in Table 9.

The obtained value of CNO2.sec is converted into CNO2

and into the emission factor EFNO2

according to the following equations:



C C1

V10NO NO

D

6

2 2sec= ⋅ ⋅ (5-8)

EF C1

HNO NOu

2 2= ⋅ ⋅VFG (5-9)

CNO2nitrogen dioxide in flue gas (in mass pollutant/volume flue gas [mg/m3])

CNO2.secnitrogen dioxide downstream of secondary measure (in mass pollutant/mass flue gas [kg/kg])

VD dry flue gas volume (in volume flue gas/mass flue gas [m3/kg])

VFG specific dry flue gas volume (in volume flue gas/mass fuel [m3/kg])

EFNO2emission factor for nitrogen dioxide [g/GJ]

Hu lower heating value [MJ/kg]

The specific dry flue gas volume VFG can be determined according to Annex 6. Emission

data expressed in [mg/m3] are used for comparing measured and calculated values.Default values for lower heating values for hard and brown coal are given in Annexes 7and 8.



Annex 6: Determination of the specific flue gas volume (flow sheet and description)

The specific flue gas volume has to be determined in order to convert the emission factors,which have been obtained in [g/GJ], into [mg/m3], which allows a comparison to measureddata. The approach is given in the following flow sheet:

CC, CS, CH2,CO2, CN2

content of fuel[kg/kg]

Default values ofvarious fuels

No

Minimum of oxygen (stoichiometric)

V 1.864 C 0.700 C 5.553 C 0.700 COmkg C S H O2min

3

2= + + −2

Volume of N2 corresponding to O2min

V VNmkg O

7921AIR

3

2min= ⋅

Dry flue gas volume (0% O2)

V 1.852 C 0.682 C 0.800 C VFGmkg C S N N

3

2= + + + air

Dry flue gas volume (reference O2 content)

V VFGmkg FG

21 O21 Oref

32

2ref= ⋅ −

−

Yes



For the determination of the flue gas volume, the elemental analysis of the fuel (content ofcarbon CC, sulphur CS, hydrogen CH, oxygen CO2

and nitrogen CN (maf)) has to be known. If

no data of the elemental analysis is available, default values of hard and brown coals areproposed in Annexes 7 and 8. The volume of oxygen required for a stoichiometric reactionVO2min

can be determined as follows:

V C C C CO C S H O2 21 864 0 700 5 553 0 700

min. . . .= ⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ − ⋅ (6-1)

VO2minvolume of oxygen required for stoichiometric reaction (in volume oxygen/mass fuel [m3/kg])

CC content of carbon in fuel (in mass carbon/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CS content of sulphur in fuel (in mass sulphur/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CH content of hydrogen in fuel (in mass hydrogen/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CO2content of oxygen in fuel (in mass oxygen/mass fuel [kg/kg])

The constants in Equation (6-1) represent stoichiometric factors for the volume of oxygenrequired for the combustion of 1 kg carbon, sulphur or hydrogen in [m3/kg]. Thecorresponding volume of nitrogen in the air VNair

is given by Equation (6-2):

V VN Oair= ⋅

2

7921

min(6-2)

VNairvolume of nitrogen in the air (in volume nitrogen/mass fuel [m3/kg])

VO2minvolume of oxygen required for stoichiometric reaction (in volume oxygen/mass fuel [m3/kg])

The specific dry flue gas volume at 0 % oxygen VFG can be determined by using Equation(6-3):

V C C C VFG C S N Nair= ⋅ + ⋅ + ⋅ +1 852 0 682 0 800. . . (6-3)

VFG specific dry flue gas volume (in volume flue gas/mass fuel [m3/kg])

CC content of carbon in fuel (in mass carbon/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CS content of sulphur in fuel (in mass sulphur/mass fuel [kg/kg])

CN content of nitrogen in fuel (in mass nitrogen/mass fuel [kg/kg])

VNairvolume of nitrogen in the air (in volume nitrogen/mass fuel [m3/kg])

The constants in Equation (6-3) represent stoichiometric factors for the volume of oxygenrequired for the combustion of 1 kg carbon, sulphur or nitrogen in [m3/kg]. The obtainedvalues of VFG at 0 % oxygen are converted to the reference content of oxygen in flue gasaccording to Equation (6-4):

V VFG FGO

Oref ref= ⋅ −

−21

212

2(6-4)

VFG refvolume of specific flue gas under reference conditions (in volume flue gas/mass fuel [m3/kg])

VFG volume of specific flue gas obtained (in volume flue gas/mass fuel [m3/kg])

O2 content of oxygen in the flue gas obtained [%]

Oref2 content of oxygen in the flue gas under reference conditions [%]



Annex 7: Composition and lower heating value (Hu) of hard coal in coal mining countries

elemental analysis (maf) [wt.-%] volatiles (maf) Hu (maf)

country C N O H S [wt.-%] [MJ/kg]

value standard

deviation

value standard

deviation

value standard

deviation

value standard

deviation

value standard

deviation

value standard

deviation

value standard

deviation

Australia1) 84.6 2.26 1.8 0.15 7.8 2.08 5.2 0.29 0.6 0.21 34.0 5.94 33.70 1,03

Canada1) 86.6 1.8 1.4 0.15 6.1 1.5 5.1 0.56 0.9 0.43 33.9 6.34 33.04 2.32

China1) 81.9 1.95 1.1 0.32 11.4 2.4 4.9 0.21 1.05 0.35 36.3 2.32 32.06 0,80

Columbia1) 78.5 6.37 1.5 0.13 12.4 4.3 5.2 0.62 0.9 0.19 42.2 2.70 31.83 1.93

Czech Rep.2) 85.98 2.23 1.5 0.17 6.27 2.30 5.09 0.70 1.16 0.68 30.88 8.92 34.00 2.44

France2) 87.91 1.76 1.29 0.24 5.60 1.58 4.50 0.47 0.70 0.17 22.81 5.82 34.86 1.56

Germany RAG1)6) 90.2 1.77 1.6 0 3 1.41 4.4 0.56 0.9 - 15.8 9.60 35.23 0.29

Ger. others2) 87.00 2.44 1.49 0.27 5.75 1.94 4.76 0.68 1.02 0.32 25.52 6.58 30.10 1.75

CIS1) 77.5 0 0.7 0 16.1 0 5.4 0 0.3 0 39.0 3.20 31.85 1.66

Hungary2) 84.10 1.51 1.42 0.69 5.79 0.54 5.09 0.11 3.62 0.55 24.4 3.98 34.16 1.05

India1) 76.5 3.22 1.3 0.25 16.2 4 5.6 0.4 0.4 0.32 47.9 2.44 29.48 2.25

Poland4) 80.0 1.0 7.0 5.0 1.0 38.5 (21.00)5)

Portugal3) 87.0 0.95 5.4 4.9 0.94 32.1 (27.58)5)

South Africa1) 80.3 5.78 2.1 0.73 8.8 1.2 4.9 1.19 0.9 0.24 31.9 2.37 32.36 0.73

UK1) 84.5 0.6 1.8 0 n. a. 5.4 0.06 n. a. 38.2 1.84 33.80 0.58

USA1) 84.3 2 1.6 0.17 7.5 1.65 5.5 0.38 1.1 0.58 38.1 4.31 33.89 0.88

Venezuela1) 84.2 1.7 1.5 0.07 7.6 2.19 6 0.49 0.7 0 43.2 3.98 34.00 1.00

1) Association of German Coal Importers 1992 /72

2) Brandt 1981 /47/

n.a. - no data are available

3) Madeira: Personal communication, EDP-Electricielade Portugal, Lisboa, May 1994

4) Debsky: Personal communication, Energy Information Centre, Warsaw, May 1994

5) lower heating value as received (ar)

6) RAG= Ruhr coal



Annex 8: Composition and lower heating value (Hu) of brown coal in coal mining countries

elemental analysis (maf) [wt.-%] volatiles (maf) Hu (maf)

country C N O H S [wt.-%] [MJ/kg]

value value value value value value value

Czech Rep.2) 70.09 3.324) 1.07 0.224) 21.74 3.424) 5.64 0.644) 1.48 0.824) 56.67 4.624) 28.2 2.394)

Germany

-Rheinisch

coal1)68 62-725) 1.0 0.7-

1.35)25.2 22-305) 5 4.5-

5.55)0.8 0.2-

1.15)386) - 27.3 19.4-31.75)

-Middle Ger.1) 72 0.8 18.3 5.5 3.4 57.5 28.8

-East Ger.1) 69.5 1.0 23.1 5.8 0.6 58.7 25.7

Hungary1) - 1 63.8 (1.1) 26.8 4.8 3.5 61.8 35.7 28.8-42.65)

Hungary2) - 2 69.82 2.624) 1.06 0.454) 18.91 2.234) 5.54 0.124) 4.49 2.464) 39.30 1.044) 28.4 1.204)

Poland7) 69.5 66-735) 1.1 0.7-

1.55)19 13-255) 6 5-75) 1 50 25 23 - 265)

Portugal2) 67.44 1.014) 0.91 0.184) 22.61 2.894) 4.4 0.744) 4.62 2.434) 54.64 8.844) 24.8 2.64)

Turkey1) - 1 61.4 0.8 29.6 5.1 5.1 n. a. 21.2 19.8-22.75)

Turkey3) - 2 62.6 7.844) 2.0 0.674) 24.0 4.484) 4.9 0.564) 6.2 4.774) 56.0 3.934) 26.6

1) IEA coal research - brown coal2) Brandt3) Kücükbayrak, S.; Kadioglu, E.: Desulphurisation of some Turkish lignites by pyrolysis, FUEL, Vol. 67, 6/19884) standard deviation5) range6) value recommended by RAG7) Debsky: Personal communication, Energy Information Centre, Warsaw, May 1994n. a. - no data available

ps010101 COMBUSTION PLANTS AS POINT SOURCES


Annex 9: Conditions for exemplary calculation of NOx emission factors

Annex 9 presents the values which have been chosen for the calculation of NOx emission factors(according to Section 4.2.1). The results of the calculations are given in the following Annexes10 (for hard coal) and 11 (for brown coal). Both annexes contain emission factors in [g/GJ] aswell as concentrations in [mg/m3] which have been determined under the conditions given inTable 9-1:

Table 9-1: Selected input parameters for model calculations determining NOx emission

factors as given in Annexes 10 and 11

Type of

coal1)Type ofboiler

Fraction ofthermal NO

NOth [ ]

Reduction efficiency ofprimary measures

ηprim2) [ ]

Reduction efficiencyof secondary

measuresηsec [ ]

Availabilityβsec [ ]

hc DBB 0,05 LNB0,20

SCR0,8

0,99

LNB/SAS0,45

LNB/OFA0,45

LNB/SAS/OFA0,60

WBB 0,30 LNB0,20

SCR0,8

0,99

LNB/SAS0,45

LNB/OFA0,40

LNB/SAS/OFA0,60

bc DBB 0,05 LNB0,20

- -

LNB/SAS0,45

LNB/OFA0,40

LNB/SAS/OFA0,60

1) Elementary analyses of hard and brown coal are given in Annexes 7 and 8.2) The reduction efficiency is given as an example for selected primary measures (see Section 4.2).

Abbreviations: hc = hard coal, bc = brown coal

For individual calculations of NOx emission factors, the computer programme (users’ manual

see Section 15 and Annex 14) can be used.



Annex 10: Emission factors and flue gas concentrations for NOx obtained by model calculations (see Annexes 4 and 5) for hard coal (Annex 7 )

Uncontrolled Primary control2) Secondary control3)

Hard coalfrom

Type ofboiler

EF

[g/GJ]

Flue gas concentration

[mg/m3]

PM1) EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

Australia DBB 568 1620 LNB 454 1300 95 270LNB/SAS 312 893 65 186LNB/OFA 312 893 65 186LNB/SAS/OFA 227 649 47 135

WBB 703 2140 LNB 562 1720 117 357LNB/SAS 387 1180 80 245LNB/OFA 422 1290 88 268LNB/SAS/OFA 281 858 59 178

Canada DBB 506 1390 LNB 405 1110 84 230LNB/SAS 278 762 58 158LNB/OFA 278 762 58 158LNB/SAS/OFA 202 554 42 115

WBB 627 1830 LNB 501 146010

304LNB/SAS 345 1010 72 209LNB/OFA 376 1100 78 228LNB/SAS/OFA 251 732 52 152

China DBB 413 1180 LNB 331 94369



Columbia DBB 535 1570 LNB 428 1250 89 261LNB/SAS 294 861 61 179LNB/OFA 294 861 61 179LNB/SAS/OFA 214 626 45 130

for footnotes see bottom of this table



Annex 10 continued, for footnotes see bottom of this table


Hard coalfrom

Type ofboiler

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

PM1) EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

Columbia WBB 662 2070 LNB 529 1650 110 344LNB/SAS 364 1140 76 237LNB/OFA 397 1240 83 258LNB/SAS/OFA 265 827 51 172

Czech DBB 483 1370 LNB 387 1100 80 228Republic LNB/SAS 266 753 55 157

LNB/OFA 266 753 55 157LNB/SAS/OFA 193 548 40 114


France DBB 374 1080 LNB 299 863 62 180LNB/SAS 205 594 43 123LNB/OFA 205 594 43 123LNB/SAS/OFA 149 432 31 90


Germany DBB 384 1090 LNB 307 872 64 181RAG LNB/SAS 211 600 44 125







Hard coalfrom

Type ofboiler

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

PM1) EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

Germany DBB 495 1240 LNB 396 990 82 206others LNB/SAS 272 681 57 142



Hungary DBB 401 1150 LNB 320 920 67 191LNB/SAS 220 633 46 132LNB/OFA 220 633 46 132LNB/SAS/OFA 160 460 33 96


CIS DBB 308 923 LNB 247 73951


WBB 382 1220 LNB 305 97564


India DBB 551 1540 LNB 441 1230 92 256LNB/SAS 303 845 63 176LNB/OFA 303 845 63 176LNB/SAS/OFA 220 615 46 128





Hard coalfrom

Type ofboiler

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

PM1) EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

India WBB 682 2030 LNB 545 1620 113 338LNB/SAS 375 1120 78 232LNB/OFA 409 1120 85 253LNB/SAS/OFA 273 812 57 169

SouthAfrica

DBB 569 1650 LNB 456 1320 95 275

LNB/SAS 313 910 65 189LNB/OFA 313 910 65 189LNB/SAS/OFA 228 662 47 138


USA DBB 563 1610 LNB 450 1290 94 268LNB/SAS 310 885 64 184LNB/OFA 310 885 64 184LNB/SAS/OFA 225 644 47 134


Venezuela DBB 588 1670 LNB 471 1340 98 278LNB/SAS 324 919 67 191LNB/OFA 324 919 67 191LNB/SAS/OFA 235 668 49 139



Annex 10 continued


Hard coalfrom

Type ofboiler

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

PM1) EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

EF

[g/GJ]


[mg/m3]

Venezuela WBB 728 2210 LNB 583 1760 121 367LNB/SAS 401 1210 83 252LNB/OFA 437 1320 91 275LNB/SAS/OFA 291 882 61 184

1) PM = primary measures 3) taking into account secondary measures mostly used: SCR: reduction efficiency = 0.8, availability = 0.992) primary measures as mostly used, see Table 8



Annex 11: Emission factors and flue gas concentrations for NOx obtained by model calculations (see Annexes 4 and 5) for brown coal (see Annex 8)

Brown coal from Type of boiler Uncontrolled Primary control

EF gGJ

Conc. mg

m3PM1)

EF gGJ

Conc. mg

m3

Czech Republic DBB 506 1.480 LNB 405 1190LNB/SAS 278 816LNB/OFA 304 890LNB/SAS/OFA 202 593

Germany- Rheinisch coal DBB 325 985 LNB 260 788

LNB/SAS 179 542LNB/OFA 195 591LNB/SAS/OFA 130 394

- Middle Germany DBB 504 1.250 LNB 403 996LNB/SAS 277 685LNB/OFA 302 747LNB/SAS/OFA 202 498

- East Germany DBB 539 1.460 LNB 431 1.160LNB/SAS 296 801LNB/OFA 323 873LNB/SAS/OFA 215 582

Hungary - 1 DBB 379 1.590 LNB 303 1.270LNB/SAS 208 874LNB/OFA 227 953LNB/SAS/OFA 151 635

Hungary - 2 DBB 379 1.100 LNB 304 879LNB/SAS 209 604LNB/OFA 228 659LNB/SAS/OFA 152 439

Portugal DBB 461 1.260 LNB 369 1.010LNB/SAS 254 696LNB/OFA 277 759LNB/SAS/OFA 185 506

Turkey - 2 DBB 725 2.240 LNB 580 1.790LNB/SAS 399 1.230LNB/OFA 435 1.340LNB/SAS/OFA 290 895

1) PM = primary measures as given in Table 8



Annex 12: Comparison between measured and calculated SO2 and NOx emission data

The proposed methodology for the determination of SO2 and NOx emission factors is describedin the Sections 4.1 and 4.2. Calculated flue gas concentrations in [mg/m3] have been used for thederivation of emission factors in [g/GJ]. A comparison of measured concentrations incombustion plants in [mg/m3] with calculated concentrations in [mg/m3] can be used forverification purposes.

A comparison of measured concentrations with calculated flue gas concentrations downstream ofthe boiler is given as an example for some power plants in Table 12-1.

Table 12-1: Comparison of measured and calculated flue gas concentrations in raw gas of theboiler (taking into account primary reduction measures)13)

Type

ofPower plant CSO2

[mg/m3] CNO2 [mg/m3]

boiler measured calculated measured calculated

DBB Altbach (FRG)1) ca. 1,700 1,380 - 1,610 ca. 600 599 - 681

Münster (FRG)2) 1,644 - 1,891 1,380 - 1,440 800 - 900 1,090

Karlsruhe (FRG)3) 1,600 - 2,000 1,310 - 1,650 900 - 1,000 923 - 1,140

Hanover (FRG)4) 1,600 - 1,800 1,610 ca. 800 681

Mehrum (FRG)5) ca. 2,700 1,610 ca. 800 990

Nuremberg (FRG)6) ca. 1,800 1,610 n. d. 1,240

Heilbronn (FRG)7) ca. 1,800 1,900 - 2,200 ≤ 800 1,050 - 1,070

IMATRAN (SF)8) n. d. 1,480 - 1,700 ca. 225 516 - 747

EPON (NL)9) 1,429 - 1,577 1,580 - 2,190 363 - 609 999 - 1,010

WBB Aschaffenburg (FRG) 10) 2,400 1,530 1,000 1,010

Charlottenburg (FRG) 11) 1,800 1,530 1,300 1,080

Karlsruhe (FRG) 12) 1,295 - 1,716 1,610 ca. 960 1,460

1) coal: Germany RAG, Germany others; reduction measures: WS; LNB/SAS, SCR; thermal capacity1,090 MW

2) coal: Germany others, αS = 0.15; reduction measure: DESONOX (ηSO2 = 0.94, ηNO2 = 0.82); thermal capacity100 MW

3) coal: individual data, αS = 0.4; reduction measures: WS (η = 0.85); LNB/opt. (η = 0.3); SCR; thermal capacity1,125 MW

4) coal: Germany others; reduction measures: SDA; LNB/OFA, SCR; thermal capacity 359 MW5) coal: Germany others; reduction measures: WS; LNB, SCR; thermal capacity 1,600 MW6) coal: Germany others; reduction measures: SDA; SCR; thermal capacity 110 MW7) coal: individual data; reduction measures: WS (η = 0.95); OFA, SCR; thermal capacity 1,860 MW

COMBUSTION IN ENERGY AND TRANSFORMATION INDUSTRIESps010101 Activities 010101 - 010105


8) coal: individual data; reduction measures: WS; LNB/OFA; electrical capacity 650 MW9) coal: individual data; reduction measures: FGD (η = 0.93); high temperature NOx reduction (η = 0.4), electrical

capacity 630 MW10) coal: Germany RAG; reduction measures: WS; SAS, SCR; thermal capacity 395 MW11) coal: Germany RAG; reduction measures: WS; OFA; thermal capacity 120 MW12) coal: individual data; reduction measures: WS (η = 0.88); SCR (η = 0.9; thermal capacity) 191 MW13) values refer to full load conditions

n. d. = no data available

Table 12-2: Comparison of measured and calculated flue gas concentrations downstream ofsecondary reduction measure (if installed)13)

Type

ofPower plant CSO2

[mg/m3] CNO2 [mg/m3]

boiler measured calculated measured calculated

DBB Altbach (FRG)1) ca. 250 150 - 176 ca. 200 125 - 142

Münster (FRG)2) 85 - 181 820 - 859 163 - 176 74

Karlsruhe (FRG)3) 240 - 300 208 - 261 190 192 - 238

Hanover (FRG)4) 200 176 150 142

Mehrum (FRG)5) 400 176 190 206

Nuremberg (FRG)6) 50 - 140 176 70 - 100 257

Heilbronn (FRG)7) 100 - 200 207 - 240 ≤ 200 218 - 223

IMATRAN (SF)8) n. d. 161 - 186 ca. 225 516 - 747

EPON (NL)9) ca. 148 113 - 184 ca. 609 999 - 1,010

WBB Aschaffenburg (FRG) 10) 70 167 200 209

Charlottenburg (FRG) 11) 175 167 163 1,080

Karlsruhe (FRG) 12) 47 - 165 207 ca. 150 159

1) - 13) for footnotes see Table 12-1 above

n.d. = no data available

The quality and quantity of data obtained by the power plant operators vary greatly. For unknowncompositions of coal and other missing parameters default values have been used (e.g. for coalcompositions see Annexes 7 and 8).



The values in Table 12-1 are compared in the Figure 12-1 below:

400

900

1400

1900

2400

2900

400 900 1400 1900 2400 2900

measured values [mg/m3]

calc

ula

ted

val

ues

[m

g/m

3]

NOx-values

SO2-values

Figure 12-1: Comparison of measured flue gas concentrations [mg/m3] and calculated flue gas

concentrations [mg/m3] downstream of the boiler

The comparison of measured flue gas concentrations and calculated flue gas concentrationsshows that most values are scattered close to the middle axis.

Good correlations between measured and calculated values have been obtained for calculationswhich are only based on plant specific data provided by power plant operators. But for mostcalculations a mixture of plant specific data and default values for missing parameters has beenused which leads to deviations from the middle axis. In particular strong differences occur forSO2 emissions which show a tendency to be overestimated. The tendency can be explained byassumptions with regard to default values; e.g. the sulphur retention in ash varies greatlydepending on the data availability.



Annex 13: Sensitivity analysis of the computer programme results

A sensitivity analysis was carried out with all model input parameters used. The 14 inputparameters (fuel content of carbon C, nitrogen N, oxygen O, hydrogen H, sulphur S, volatilesVolat, lower heating value Hu, sulphur retention in ash αs, fraction of thermal nitrogen oxide

NOth, reduction efficiency η and availability β of abatement measures) was arranged with

respect to their influence on SO2 and NOx emissions. Each input parameter was varied by ±10 %

except βSO2 and βsec.NOx which were varied only by - 4 % (dashed line); the variation of thecalculated emission factors is presented in Figure 13-1.

∆y [ ] y

NOx

NOx

NOx

NOx

NOx

NOxNOx

NOx NOx

NOx

SO2

SO2 SO2 SO2 SO2 SO2

SO2

SO2

SO2

2NO = SOx

low high

C N O H S Volat Hu α s NOth SO2

SO2

ηη prim

β ηNOx

βsecNOx

sec

-0.05

-0.10

0.05

0.10

0.15

-0.15

NO x

∆y/y relative change of emission factors (pollutant as indicated)

Figure 13-1: Sensitivity analysis of the emission factor calculation programme results forpulverised coal combustion

For emission factors of SO2 the sulphur content of fuel and the sulphur retention in ash are

highly relevant. For emission factors of NOx the fuel content of nitrogen, carbon and volatiles as

well as the reduction efficiency of primary measures are highly relevant. The fuel contents ofoxygen and hydrogen are not relevant. The relative change of emission factors concerning thelower heating value can be described for SO2 and NOx as an exponential curve: that means that

uncertainties at lower levels of the heating values (e.g. for brown coal) influence the resultstronger. The efficiency of secondary measures is of slightly less influence than the efficiency ofprimary measures. The availability of secondary measures is marked with a dashed line in Figure13-1; a 4 % variation of this parameter has shown significant influence.



Annex 14: Users’ manual for the emission factor calculation programme (for September1995 version)

Determination of SO2 and NOx emission factors for large combustion plants

1 Computer specifications

This programme requires MICROSOFT WINDOWS 3.1, a 3½" floppy disc drive, and at least200 Kbyte on the hard disc. The programme has been designed in MICROSOFT EXCEL 4.0 -English Version.

2 Installation

The floppy disc received contains 19 files. All these files have to be installed on the hard disc.The following users’ guide is stored under README.DOC (written with MICROSOFT WORDFOR WINDOWS 2.1).

The software has to be installed on your hard disk "C" by using the following procedure:

- Create a new sub-directory with the name 'POWER_PL' by following the instructions:

- in DOS go to C:\- type: MD POWER_PL- hit the <ENTER>-key- change into this sub-directory by typing: CD POWER_PL- hit the <ENTER>-key.

- To copy all the files from your floppy disc into the sub-directory 'POWER_PL' proceed asfollows:

- insert your disk into slot A (or B) of your PC- type COPY A: (or B:)\*.*- hit the <ENTER>-key.

The installation of the programme is then complete.

3 How to work with the programme

3.1 Start the programme

- Start MICROSOFT WINDOWS 3.1 and MICROSOFT EXCEL 4.0 - English Version (orMICROSOFT EXCEL 5.0 - English Version).

- In 'FILE' - 'OPEN', go to hard disk 'C' and activate the sub-directory 'POWER_PL'. Then youwill see all the necessary files in the programme in the left window.

- Choose the file 'POWER_PL.XLW' and hit the <ENTER>-key.

- Then the programme opens all the tables and macros needed.



3.2 Further proceedings with the programme

- When you see the first screen please type 'Ctrl'-'a' (or 'Strg'-'a') to start the programme. Byhitting these two keys you start a macro, which takes you through all the levels of theprogramme. The input data for the programme are divided into background tables for thefuel used, for SO2-specification and NOx-specification.

Fuel data input

- First the programme asks for an identification of the model run. You are free to put in thename of the power plant, type of boiler, type of fuel (e. g. Heilbronn - dry bottom boiler -hard coal).

- The next window requests the type of coal (hard coal or lignite).

- The programme asks you to choose one of the fuel compositions listed. Select one ofthem by typing the corresponding number and hitting the 'OK'-key on the screen1). If thedefault values of the given fuel compositions do not correspond with your power plant,you have the possibility of putting in corrected values by choosing the last line of thetable (line 17 or 10). Then the programme asks you to enter in the individual values. Thevalues given by the 'question-window' can be kept by hitting the 'OK'-key on the screen.

- Then the programme asks for the water content of the fuel and the reference-content ofoxygen in the flue gas. The value given by the 'question-window' can be retained byhitting the 'OK'-key on the screen.

SO2 data specification

- The programme asks you to choose one of the listed numbers as a value for the sulphurretention in ash. Please select one of them by typing the corresponding number and hittingthe 'OK'-key on the screen1). If the default values for the sulphur retention in ash do notcorrespond with your power plant, you have the possibility of putting in corrected valuesby choosing the last line of the table (line 3). Then the programme asks you to put in thevalue.

- The programme asks you to choose one of the listed secondary measures SO2 . Please

select one of them by typing the corresponding number and hitting the 'OK'-key on thescreen1). If the default values of the efficiencies and availabilities of the secondarymeasures given do not correspond with those of your power plant, you have thepossibility of putting put in corrected values by choosing the last line of the table (line 9).Then the programme asks you to put in the individual values.

At this point the calculations for SO2 are finished.

NOx data specification

- The programme proceeds with the calculations of NO2 by asking for a value for

NOthermal1. At this stage, the thermal NO (NOthermal) has to be put in as an exogenious

value as given in the table. You have the possibility of putting in a new value byfollowing the instructions on the screen.



- The next window requests the type of boiler (wet bottom boiler WBB- dry bottom boilerDBB).

- Then you have to choose a type of combination of primary measure installed. For someprimary measures, reduction efficiencies are given as default values11. If you have betterdata available, you can put in new values choosing the last line of the table (line 17) andfollow the instructions on the screen.

- Finally, you have to choose a type of combination of secondary measure installed1. Asmentioned above, you can put in different values of efficiencies and availabilities bychoosing one secondary measure from the table (typing the corresponding number). Orelse you can put in your own values by selecting the last line of the table (line 6). Pleasefollow the instructions on the screen.

At the end the following message appears on the screen: You can save the data-sheet named'AINPUSO2.XLS' under a different name.

If you want to do further model runs, just type 'Ctrl'-'a' (or 'Strg'-'a') and the programme startsagain.

In order to finish your calculation, just quit EXCEL without saving changes in any of the19 basic files of this software.

11 If the tables with the default values are overlapped by a 'question-window' you can move this window: point on

the headline of this little window with your mouse-pointer, hold your left mouse-button and move it.



Annex 15: Frame conditions of the detailed investigation concerning start-up emissions andstart-up emission factors /based on 116/

Approach

Start-ups have to be considered in a boiler-by-boiler approach. In order to determine therelevance of start-up emissions compared to full load emissions, measured emission data for SO2,NO2 and CO obtained from power plant operators have been analysed. Start-up emissions andstart-up emission factors have been determined in principle by using the detailed methodologydescribed in Section 5.

Technical specifications

The analysis of start-up emissions was accomplished by using measured values from dry bottomboilers, wet bottom boilers and a gas fired boiler. The interpretation of start-up emissions andstart-up emission factors should take into account specifications in the design of the boilers andin the configuration of secondary measures installed. In the following, particularities of theboilers considered are given:

- Dry bottom boiler (thermal capacity 1,050 MW and 1,147 MW, hard coal fuelled)

The smaller boiler is equipped with a primary measure for NOx reduction (SAS). The SCR isarranged in a high dust configuration (SCR-precipitator-FGD). This boiler is often startedslowly and directly connected to the FGD.

The larger boiler is also equipped with a primary measure for NOx reduction (SAS). The SCRis also arranged in a high dust configuration (SCR-precipitator-FGD). Due to specialarrangements (individual construction of two heat exchangers without any slip between rawand clean flue gas) when this boiler is started up the FGD is by-passed. This boiler is alsocalled „quick“ start-up boiler.

- Wet bottom boiler (thermal capacity 499 MW each, hard coal fuelled)

One boiler is equipped with primary measures for NOx (like OFA and improved coal mills).The other boiler is not equipped with primary measures. Both boilers are equipped with acommon FGD. The SCR is arranged in a tail-end-configuration (precipitator-FGD-SCR) andequipped with a natural gas fired additional furnace. The type of FGD is wet scrubbing (WS).Both boilers are started up directly connected to the FGD.

- Natural gas fired boiler (thermal capacity 1,023 MW)

This boiler is rarely used. It is designed for quick start-ups. As a primary measure, special NOx

burners are installed. As a secondary measure an SCR is installed. SOx abatement is notnecessary due to the fact that low sulphur fuels are used.

Boilers without secondary measures show start-up emissions which are below the emissionsunder full load conditions. During start-ups boilers with secondary measures often showsignificantly higher SO2 emissions than during the same time under full load conditions. Start-upemissions are released until the secondary measures are working under optimal conditions (for



SO2 and NO2). CO emissions can be significant up to the time when the boiler operates atminimum load.

The relevance of start-up emissions depends on the following parameters which have to beconsidered when interpreting measured values (emissions or emission factors):

- the type of boiler (e.g. wet bottom boilers always release higher NOx emissions than drybottom boilers, due to higher combustion temperatures),

- the type of fuel used (e.g. SOx emissions are directly related to the sulphur content of the fuel;fuel-nitrogen also contributes to the formation of NOx),

- the status of the boiler at starting-time (hot, warm or cold start, see Table 11).

- the specifications of any individual start-up, like

-- the duration and the velocity of the start-up,

-- load level obtained (reduced load or full load),

-- the configuration of secondary measures (e.g. the start-up time of the high-dust-configurations (SCR-precipitator-FGD) depends on the boiler load, due to the fact thatthe SCR catalyst is directly heated by the flue gas; tail-end-configurations (precipitator-FGD-SCR) can have shorter start-up times, due to the fact that the SCR catalyst can bepreheated by an additional burner),

-- start-up of the flue gas desulphurisation directly or in by-pass configuration,

-- emission standards which have to be met (boiler-specific emission standards can be setup below the demands of the LCP Directive).



Annex 16: List of abbreviations

a Content of ash in coal (wt.-%)

AC Activated Carbon Process

ar As received

bc Brown coal

BFCB Bubbling Fluidised Bed Combustion

CFn Correction factor for month n [ ]

CFBC Circulating Fluidised Bed Combustion

CC Combined Cycle

CI Compression Ignition

CMHMFA raw. Heavy metal concentration in raw gas fly ash [ gMg ]

CMHMFA clean.Heavy metal concentration in fly ash in clean flue gas [ g

Mg ]

C Expected value (mean value) of the flue gas concentration [ mg

m3 ]

Ci Concentration [kgkg

], [g

Mg], [

mg

m3 ], i = SO2, Sfuel etc.

CODPOL Code of pollutants according to CORINAIR

Dk Number of days per month

DBB Dry Bottom Boiler

DeNOx Denitrification unit(s)

DESONOX Type of simultaneous process for SO2 and NOx removal based on catalyticreaction

DSI Dry Sorbent Injection

E Emission within the period considered [Mg]

EA Emission during start-up period [Mg]

EV Emission for full load conditions during start-up period [Mg]

EFA Emission factor for start-up time [g/GJ]

EFReduced load Emission factor for reduced load conditions [g/MWh]

EFV Emission factor under full load conditions [g/GJ]

EFi Emission factor, mostly in the unit [g

GJ], i = SO2, NOx, CO2 etc.

EFf Fly ash emission factor of raw gas [kg/Mg]

ESP Electrostatic precipitator

fa Fraction of ash leaving combustion chamber as particulate matter (wt.-%)

fe Enrichment factor [ ]

fg Fraction of heavy metal emitted in gaseous form (wt.-%)

fk Factor of day k



fn Factor for month

fn,l Factor for hour

FE Ratio for start-up and full load emissions [ ]

FEF Ratio for start-up and full load emission factors [ ]

FBC Fluidised Bed Combustion

FGD Flue Gas Desulphurisation

FGR Flue Gas Recirculation

g Gaseous state of aggregation

GF Grate Firing

GHV Gross Heating Value

GT Gas Turbine

hc Hard coal

HM Heavy metal, trace elements

Hu Lower heating value [ MJkg

]

kload Ratio of reduced load to full load emission factor [ ]

Kc Mean efficiency of dust control equipment (%)

Kt Share of plant capacity connected to dust control equipment (%)

l Liquid state of aggregation

L Actual load

LCP Large Combustion Plant

LIFAC Special type of DSI, mostly used in Finland

LNB Low NOx BurnerLm& Fuel consumption during periods at reduced load conditions [GJ]

Vm& Fuel consumption during full load periods [GJ]

fuelm& Fuel consumption per time unit [kga

], [kg

h]

FAm& Average annually emitted fly ash

a

Mg

Aqm& Fuel consumption during start-up period [GJ]; q= type of start-up (cold start,

warm start, hot start)

maf Moisture and ash free

NMVOC Non-Methane Volatile Organic Compounds

Nof uel Fuel based emission of nitrogen oxide

NOthermal Thermal nitric oxide

OFA Overfire Air



P Daily coal consumption [Mgd

]

PM Primary Measure

RAG Coal mined in Rhine area in Germany

s Solid state of aggregation

SAS Staged Air Supply

SC Simple Cycle

SCR Selective Catalytic Reduction

SI Spark Ignition

SNAP Selected Nomenclature of Air Pollutants

SNCR Selective Non-Catalytic Reduction

SNOX Technical specification of DESONOX-process

SPA Spray Dryer Absorption

SPF Split Primary Flow

ST Stoker

Stat. E. Stationary Engine

V& Flue gas volume flow rate [ m

h

3

]

V& Average flow rate [ m

h

3

]

VD Dry flue gas volume per mass flue gas [ mkg

3]

VFG Dry flue gas volume per mass fuel [ mkg

3]

VOC Volatile Organic Compounds

WAP Walter Process

WBB Wet Bottom Boiler

WL Wellmann-Lord

WS Wet Scrubbing

αs Sulphur retention in ash [ ]

βsec Availability of secondary abatement technique [ ]

γ Fraction of thermal-NO formed [ ]

ηi Reduction efficiency [ ], i = primary measure, secondary measure

Combustion Plants as Point Sources

Documents

Transcript of Combustion Plants as Point Sources